Aquatic Effects Data

Fomesafen data were originally submitted in the 1980’s.  As technical fomesafen is only slightly soluble in water, some aquatic tests were conducted with the technical formulation.  Some results were expressed in terms of active ingredient (ai), and some were not.  The table below is from the spreadsheet used to convert study results for use in the risk assessment.  Tables on the following page show the data as reported in the main body of the risk assessment

Statistical Analysis of Aquatic Guideline Data

Data reviews for fomesafen studies were conducted prior to implementation of current format, which includes statistical analysis output.  Submitted data were reanalyzed using TOXANAL.  Output is shown below.

Rainbow Trout LC50 (MRID 103023)

Formulation Test, Data presented as ppm a.i.

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE MOVING AVERAGE METHOD

 SPAN         G             LC50          95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS

 3             4.538912E-02                122.8529      115.8801

 130.5561

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE PROBIT METHOD

ITERATIONS    G              H            GOODNESS OF FIT PROBABILITY

 5             .1107277      1             .4267987

SLOPE    =     14.60391

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS  = 9.744345     AND    19.46347

LC50 =         126.1463

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 116.9657 AND  134.5229

LC10 =         103.2551

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 89.33874 AND  112.2619

Observed NOAEC 80 ppm a.i.

Observed LOAEC 104 ppm a.i.

Daphnia Formulation (MRID 103024)

Converted to ppm a.i.

Test 1

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE MOVING AVERAGE METHOD

 SPAN         G             LC50          95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS

 6             2.396329E-02                377.6351      308.34

 457.0631

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE PROBIT METHOD

ITERATIONS    G              H            GOODNESS OF FIT PROBABILITY

 9             9.542178E-02                1             .9692729

SLOPE    =     5.607484

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS  = 3.875308     AND    7.339659

LC50 =         375.9313

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 322.9891 AND  437.334

LC10 =         223.1645

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 167.035 AND  266.9592

Observed NOAEC 117 ppm a.i.

Observed LOAEC 227 ppm a.i.

Daphnia Test 2

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE PROBIT METHOD

ITERATIONS    G              H            GOODNESS OF FIT PROBABILITY

 7             4.173839      36.01717      0

A PROBABILITY OF 0 MEANS THAT IT IS LESS THAN 0.001

SINCE THE PROBABILITY IS LESS THAN 0.05, RESULTS CALCULATED

USING THE PROBIT METHOD PROBABLY SHOULD NOT BE USED.

SLOPE    =     3.668311

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS  =-3.826039     AND    11.16266

LC50 =         514.0042

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 0 AND +INFINITY

LC10 =         231.6107

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 0 AND +INFINITYMysid Acute LC50 (MRID135647)

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE MOVING AVERAGE METHOD

 SPAN         G             LC50          95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS

 1             .2345372      24.77577      19.11372      38.04456

RESULTS CALCULATED USING THE PROBIT METHOD

ITERATIONS    G              H            GOODNESS OF FIT PROBABILITY

 6             1.863364      2.90676       3.325069E-02

SINCE THE PROBABILITY IS LESS THAN 0.05, RESULTS CALCULATED

USING THE PROBIT METHOD PROBABLY SHOULD NOT BE USED.

SLOPE    =     2.350842

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS  =-.8581767     AND    5.559861

LC50 =         27.19182

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 0 AND +INFINITY

LC10 =         7.838018

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE LIMITS = 0 AND +INFINITY

 Reported Aquatic Effects Data

Species	LC50 (ppm)	95% C.I. (ppm)	NOAEC (ppm)	Classification1

(MRID)

Freshwater Organisms

Water flea2

(Daphnia magna)	376	323-437	117	Core

(163169)

Formulation

Rainbow Trout2

(Onchorynchus mykiss)	126	117-135	80	Core

(103023)

Formulation

Estuarine/ Marine organisms

Mysid shrimp

(Mysidopsis bahia)	25	19-38	ND	Core

(135647)

Technical

Sheepshead minnow

(Cyprinodon varigetus)	>163	ND	>163	Core

(135651)

Formulation

1Data are from studies originally reviewed and classified in 1984, some of which used formulated product.  2For purposes of this risk assessment, test concentrations were adjusted for percent a.i. if necessary, and endpoints were re-calculated using TOXANAL software.

Species	NOAEC (ppm)	LOAEC

 (ppm)	Endpoints Affected	Classification1

(MRID)

Freshwater Organisms

Water flea

(Daphnia magna)	50	100	Reduced growth,

Total # of offspring	Core

(135642)

Formulation

Estuarine/ Marine organisms

Mysid shrimp

(Mysidopsis bahia)	0.7	1.7	Parental mortality	Core

(135648)

Formulation

Sheepshead minnow2

(Cyprinodon varigetus)	12.2	20.1	Reduced larval survival	Core

(135644)

Formulation

1Data are from studies originally reviewed and classified in 1984, some of which used formulated product.  2For purposes of this risk assessment, test concentrations were adjusted for percent a.i.

Aquatic Risk Quotient Calculations

EFED does not currently use an automated program to calculate aquatic RQs.  Shown below is the spreadsheet used in the calculation.

Statistical Analysis of Terrestrial Guideline Data

Data reviews for fomesafen studies were conducted prior to implementation of current format which includes statistical analysis output.  Submitted data were reanalyzed using TOXANAL.  Output is shown below.

Mallard Acute LD50 (MRID) 163168

Group	Dose (ppm)	# Birds	#Birds Died

Control	0	10	0

1	2500	10	1

2	5000	10	1

NO METHOD CAN CALCULATE ANY RESULTS IF THE PERCENT

DEAD IS THE SAME AT ALL TESTED CONCENTRATIONS.

Mallard Dietary LC50 ( MRID 163384)

Nominal Test concentrations (ppm)  1756, 2634, 3951, 5926, 8889, 13,333; 20,000

No mortalities occurred in test concentrations

LC50>20,000 ppm

Bobwhite Quail Dietary LC50 (MRID 103022)

Nominal Test concentrations (ppm)  1756, 2634, 3951, 5926, 8889, 13,333; 20,000

One mortality occurred in 20,000 ppm test concentrations

LC50>20,000 ppm

NOTE TO REVIEWER: THIS DATA SET DOES NOT MEET

THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THE COMMITTEE ON

METHODS FOR TOXICITY TESTS WITH AQUATIC ORGANISMS

BECAUSE NO PERCENT DEAD IS GREATER THAN 65 PERCENT.

NEITHER THE BINOMIAL TEST NOR THE MOVING AVERAGE METHOD

CAN GIVE ANY RESULTS FOR THIS DATA.  EITHER THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION

KILLED LESS THAN 50 PERCENT OR THE LOWEST KILLED MORE THAN 50.

IF THE PROBIT SLOPE IS NEGATIVE, ENTER DATA AGAIN USING NUMBER

ALIVE INSTEAD OF NUMBER DEAD.

Female Guinea Pig LC50 Data (MRID 164900)

CONC.        	 NUMBER	 NUMBER 	PERCENT	BINOMIAL

              	EXPOSED	DEAD       	DEAD       	PROB.(PERCENT)

 1950          	5            	5             	100           	3.125

 975           	5             	5             	100           	3.125

 487           	5             	1             	20            	18.75

 244           	5            	0             	0             	3.125

THE BINOMIAL TEST SHOWS THAT  0 AND +INFINITY CAN BE

USED AS STATISTICALLY SOUND CONSERVATIVE 95 PERCENT

CONFIDENCE LIMITS, BECAUSE THE ACTUAL CONFIDENCE LEVEL

ASSOCIATED WITH THESE LIMITS IS GREATER THAN 95 PERCENT.

AN APPROXIMATE LC50 FOR THIS SET OF DATA IS 607.0274

WHEN THERE ARE LESS THAN TWO CONCENTRATIONS AT WHICH THE

PERCENT DEAD IS BETWEEN 0 AND 100, NEITHER THE MOVING AVERAGE NOR THE PROBIT METHOD CAN GIVE ANY STATISTICALLY SOUND RESULTS.

Reported Terrestrial Guideline Data

Shown below is terrestrial animal guideline data as reported in the main body of the risk assessment.

Acute Studies

Species	LC50 (ppm)	95% C.I. (ppm)	NOAEC (ppm)	Classification1

(MRID)

Acute dose

Mallard duck	>5,000	ND	<2,500	Core

(163168)

Rat	F 1499

M 1858	(1302-1749)

(1420-2546)	1219

975	Minimum

(164901)

Mouse	F  745

M  766	(512-1286)

(525-1341)	487

312	Minimum

(164901)

Guinea Pig	F  607	ND	244	Minimum

(164901)

Acute dietary

Bobwhite quail	>20,000	ND	13,333	Core

(103022)

Mallard duck	>20,000	ND	20,000	Core

(163384)

1Data are from studies originally reviewed and classified in 1984.

ND-Not determined

Chronic Studies

Species	NOAEC (ppm)	LOAEC

(ppm)	Endpoint Affected	Classification1

(MRID)

Bobwhite quail	51	ND	None	Core

(135640)

Mallard duck	46	ND	None	Core

(135639)

Rat	250	1000	Number of pups born live, number of pups surviving Acceptable

(144862)

1Data are from studies originally reviewed and classified in 1984.

ND-Not determined

Adjustment of Mammalian Endpoints

TREX calculates mammalian risk quotients based on the weight of a standard laboratory rat (350 g).  There is currently no method within the spreadsheet to adjust for alternative weights if a different animal is more sensitive.  Shown below is the spreadsheet used to determine adjusted LC50s, based on mean weight.  Mean weight is the average of the reported weight range for the test animals.

Adjusted LC50 =  Reported LC50 * (Mean weight/standard weight)^0.25

Data From Reported Terrestrial Insect Studies

Terrestrial Plant Data

The existing data package for fomesafen included efficacy data, but not guideline plant tests.  Upon request, the registrant submitted guideline studies.  At the time of the risk assessment, these studies had not yet been processed through EFED’s Data Evaluation Review.  Data taken directly from the submitted study is presented below, and the most sensitive endpoints were used in the risk assessment.  Provisional classification of the studies is supplemental.  Slight modifications in endpoints due to a different method of statistical analysis are not expected to affect overall risk conclusions.

Fomesafen Guideline Tests (provisional data, not yet reviewed (PDB 11/22/05)

Vegetative vigor (MRID 46673802)

Species	Common	Class	EC25 (lb ai/A)	NOAEC (lb ai/A)	Endpoint

Raphanus sativus	radish	D	0.0016	0.00098	height

Lactuca sativa	lettuce	D	0.0017	NR	biomass

Brassica napus	oilseed rape	D	0.0034	0.002	biomass

Beta vulgaris	sugarbeet	D	0.16	0.063	biomass

Lycopersicon esculentum	tomato	D	0.25	0.063	biomass

Glycine max	soybean	D	>0.50	0.5	none affected

	Echniochloa crus-galli	barnyard grass	M	0.31	0.25	biomass

Allium cepa	onion	M	>0.50	0.5	none affected

Avena sativa	oat	M	>0.50	0.5	none affected

Zea mays	field corn	M	>0.50	0.5	none affected

	NR- not reported

Species	Common	Class	Seedling emergence (MRID 46673801)

Raphanus sativus	radish	D	EC25 (lb ai/A)	NOAEC (lb ai/A)	Endpoint

Lactuca sativa	lettuce	D	0.11	0.13	survival

Brassica napus	oilseed rape	D	0.23	0.25	biomass

Beta vulgaris	sugarbeet	D	0.079	0.13	survival

Lycopersicon esculentum	tomato	D	0.37	0.5	survival

Glycine max	soybean	D	0.005	0.16	survival

	>0.50	0.5	none affected

Echniochloa crus-galli	barnyard grass	M

	Allium cepa	onion	M	>0.50	0.5	none affected

Avena sativa	oat	M	0.089	0.13	biomass

Zea mays	field corn	M	>0.50	0.5	none affected

	>0.50	0.5	none affected

NR- not reported

  FILENAME  Appendix E Ecological Effects Data  	E-  PAGE  12


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34216-34217]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14509]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC11-521-001]

Commission Information Collection Activities (Ferc-521), Proposed
Collection; Comment Request; Submitted for OMB Review

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3506(c) (2) (a)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is soliciting public comment
on the specific aspects of the information collection described below.

DATES: Comments in consideration of the collection of information are
due July 13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be filed either electronically (eFiled) or in
paper format, and should refer to Docket No. IC11-521-001. Documents
must be prepared in an acceptable filing format and in compliance with
Commission submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. eFiling instructions are available at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. First time users must follow
eRegister instructions at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/eregistration.asp, to establish a username and password before eFiling.
The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgement to the sender's
e-mail address upon receipt of eFiled comments. Commenters making an
eFiling should not make a paper filing. Commenters that are not able to
file electronically must send an original of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in
this docket may do so through eSubscription at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp. In addition, all comments and FERC
issuances may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely through FERC's
eLibrary at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp, by searching
on Docket No. IC11-521. For user assistance, contact FERC Online
Support by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at: (866)
208-3676 (toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collected under the
requirements of FERC-521, ``Payments for Benefits from Headwater
Benefits'' (OMB No. 1902-0087), is used by the Commission to implement
the statutory provisions of section 10(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA) (16 U.S.C. 803). The FPA authorizes the Commission to determine
headwater benefits received by downstream hydropower project owners.
Headwater benefits is the additional energy production possible at a
downstream hydropower project resulting from the regulation of river
flows by an upstream storage reservoir.
    When the Commission completes a study of a river basin, it
determines headwater benefits charges that will be apportioned among
the various downstream beneficiaries. A headwater benefits charge and
the cost incurred by the Commission to complete an evaluation are paid
by downstream hydropower project owners. In essence, the owners of non-
federal hydropower projects that directly benefit from a headwater
improvement must pay an equitable portion of the annual charges for
interest, maintenance, and depreciation of the headwater project to the
U.S. Treasury. The regulations provide for apportionment of these costs
between the headwater project and downstream projects based on
downstream energy gains and propose equitable apportionment methodology
that can be applied to all rivers basins in which headwater
improvements are built. The Commission requires owners of non-federal
hydropower projects to file data for determining annual charges as
outlined in 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 11.
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current expiration date with no changes to the existing collection of
data.
    Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this collection is
estimated as:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of        Number of     Average  burden    Total annual
               Data collection                  respondents     responses  per     hours  per     burden  hours
                                               annually  (1)   respondent  (2)   response  (3)   (1) x (2) x (3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-521....................................               3                1               40              120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated cost burden to respondents is $8,214 (120 hours/2,080
hours \1\ per year, times $142,372 \2\ = $8,214). The cost per
respondent is $2,738.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Estimated number of hours an employee works each year.
    \2\ Estimated average annual cost per employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways
to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5)
searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of
information; and (7) transmitting, or otherwise disclosing the
information.
    The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for
professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect
overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to
providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost
for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs
incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs
apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than
any one particular function or activity.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology e.g. permitting electronic submission of
responses.

    Dated: June 6, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-14509 Filed 6-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:
"Jones, DonnaLee"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Tue, 30 Aug 2022 13:52:45
To:
"Tunno; Brett J"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mike Dzurinko<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: U. S. Steel - Clairton Plant - Monitoring Plan Submission
Hello Brett and Mike: Thank you for the submission of your QAPP in response to the 2022 Clean Air Act section 114 test request for the Coke Ovens RTR. We reviewed your submission and had the following comments and requests:

"The SODAR met station should be used for the testing. The interior sample locations are good, but the TO-15 upwind fenceline location should be moved to the same location as the TO-13 upwind site, which appears to be better sited for removing potential interferents. The usage status of the two storage tanks excluded from the fenceline perimeter should be confirmed to ensure their exclusion is appropriate."

Please submit a revised QAPP documents addressing these deficiencies by Monday, September 12, 2022 COB.

Thank you for your efforts wth this 114 request.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

From: Tunno, Brett J<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 5:20 PM
To: Coke ICR2<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: Dzurinko, Mike G<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: U. S. Steel - Clairton Plant - Monitoring Plan Submission

Good afternoon,

Attached is the proposed U. S. Steel  -  Clairton Plant Fugitive Monitoring Plan as required by the ICR.  Please reach out to Mike Dzurinko and me if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Brett Tunno, DrPH, CPH
Environmental Affairs
United States Steel Corporation
Office:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Cell:<PHONE_NUMBER>
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30735]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13923]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0538]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; China Basin, San Francisco, CA

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 3rd Street Drawbridge across China
Basin, mile 0.0, at San Francisco, CA. The deviation is necessary to
allow participants to cross the bridge, uninterrupted, during the San
Francisco Marathon. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in the
closed-to-navigation position during the deviation period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. on July 23,
2017.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation [USCG-2017-0538], 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Carl T. Hausner, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The City of San Francisco has requested a
temporary change to the operation of the 3rd Street Drawbridge, mile
0.0, over China Basin, at San Francisco, CA. The drawbridge navigation
span provides a vertical clearance of 3 feet above Mean High Water in
the closed-to-navigation position. The draw opens on signal if at least
one hour notice is given, as required by 33 CFR 117.149. Navigation on
the waterway is recreational.
    The drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position
from 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. on July 23, 2017, to allow participants to cross
the bridge, uninterrupted, during the San Francisco Marathon. This
temporary deviation has been coordinated with the waterway users. No
objections to the proposed temporary deviation were raised.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may
do so at anytime. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies.
There is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The Coast
Guard will also inform the users of the waterway through our Local and
Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge so that vessel operators 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: June 27, 2017.
C.T. Hausner,
District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-13923 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49899-49901]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17815]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0129; FRL-9949-65-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Alabama: Volatile Organic Compounds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
revision to the Alabama State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on October
26, 2015. The revision modifies the definition of ``volatile organic
compounds'' (VOC). Specifically, the revision adds three compounds to
the list of those excluded from the VOC definition on the basis that
these compounds make a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone
formation. This action is being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective September 27, 2016 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by August 29, 2016.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2016-0129 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Mr. Wong can also
be reached via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, occurs when VOC and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the
presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of ozone,
EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOCs and NOX
that can be released into the atmosphere. VOC are those compounds of
carbon (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid,
metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate) that form
ozone through atmospheric photochemical reactions. Compounds of carbon
(or organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; they do not
react at the same speed or do not form ozone to the same extent.
    Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that EPA has the authority to
define the meaning of ``VOC,'' and hence what compounds shall be
treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. It has been EPA's policy that
compounds of carbon with negligible reactivity need not be regulated to
reduce ozone and should be excluded from the regulatory definition of
VOC. See 42 FR 35314 (July 8, 1977), 70 FR 54046 (September 13, 2005).
EPA

determines whether a given carbon compound has ``negligible''
reactivity by comparing the compound's reactivity to the reactivity of
ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its regulations at 40 CFR
51.100(s) and excludes them from the definition of VOC. The chemicals
on this list are often called ``negligibly reactive.'' EPA may
periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive compounds to add or
delete compounds.
    EPA issued final rules approving the addition of three compounds to
the list of those compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of
VOC. The three compounds are: trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene
(Solstice\TM\ 1233zd(E)), 78 FR 53029 (August 28, 2013); 2,3,3,3-
tetrafluoropropene, 78 FR 62451 (October 22, 2013); and 2-amino-2-
methyl-1-propanol (AMP), 79 FR 17037 (March 27, 2014). Alabama is
updating its SIP to be consistent with those changes to federal
regulations.

II. Analysis of State's Submittal

    On October 26, 2015, ADEM submitted a SIP revision \1\ to EPA for
review and approval. The revision modifies the definition of VOC found
at Alabama Administrative Code section 335-3-1-.02(gggg). Specifically,
the revision adds three compounds--trans 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoroprop-
1-ene (Solstice\TM\ 1233zd(E)); 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; and 2-
amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP)--to the list of those excluded from the
VOC definition on the basis that each of these compounds makes a
negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Alabama's October 26, 2015, submission to EPA also included
changes to Alabama Administrative Code Chapters 335-3-5 and 335-3-8
to implement EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule and changes to the
State's Regional Haze Plan. EPA is not taking action on those
changes at this time. In addition, Alabama's October 26, 2015,
submission included changes to Chapters 335-3-10 (New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS)) and 335-3-11 (National Emissions
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)). The NSPS and
NESHAP are not part of the federally approved Alabama SIP, thus EPA
is not taking any action regarding Chapters 335-3-10 and 335-3-11 in
today's rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These changes are consistent with section 110 of the CAA and meet
the regulatory requirements pertaining to SIPs. Pursuant to CAA section
110(l), the Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in CAA section
171), or any other applicable requirement of the Act. The revision to
Rule 335-3-1-.02(gggg) is approvable under section 110(l) because it
reflects changes to federal regulations based on findings that the
three aforementioned compounds are negligibly reactive.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Alabama
Regulation section 335-3-1-.02 ``Definitions,'' effective November 24,
2015, which revised the definition of VOC. Therefore, this material has
been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State implementation plan,
has been incorporated by reference by EPA into that plan, is fully
federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the
effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be
incorporated by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in
the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\ EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact
the person identified in the ``For Further Information Contact''
section of this preamble for more information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is approving the revision
to the Alabama SIP changing the VOC definition. EPA has evaluated
Alabama's October 26, 2015, submittal and has determined that it meets
the applicable requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and is
consistent with EPA policy.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective September 27,
2016 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by August 29, 2016.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on September 27, 2016 and
no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    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. EPA will submit a report containing this action 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. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 27, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 15, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart B--Alabama

0
2. Section 52.50(c) is amended by revising the entry for ``Section 335-
3-1-.02'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.50  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                            EPA Approved Alabama Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State
          State citation                Title/subject      effective date             EPA approval date                         Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Chapter 335-3-1--General Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 335-3-1-.02...............  Definitions..........      11/24/2015  7/29/2016 [Insert Federal Register      Revised paragraph (gggg) (definition
                                                                            citation].                              of ``VOC'')
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-17815 Filed 7-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 166 (Wednesday, August 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 51208]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20342]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72894; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-56]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change Amending Rule 13--Equities To Make the Add Liquidity Only
Modifier Available for Additional Limit Orders and Make the Day Time-
In-Force Condition Available for Intermarket Sweep Orders

August 21, 2014.
    On June 27, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\3\ a proposed rule change to amend NYSE Rule 13--Equities
to make the Add Liquidity Only modifier available for additional limit
orders and make the day time-in-force condition available for
Intermarket Sweep Orders. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on July 11, 2014.\4\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72547 (July 7,
2014), 79 FR 40169.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time
to consider the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\6\ designates October 9, 2014, as the date by which the Commission
should either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to
determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number
SR-NYSEMKT-2014-56).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-20342 Filed 8-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 194 (Monday, October 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 53555]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21855]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment To Change Land Use From
Aeronautical to Non Aeronautical for 25.88 Acres at Barnstable
Municipal Airport, Hyannis, MA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request
from the Town of Barnstable, MA to change the land use from
Aeronautical to Non Aeronautical for 25.88 Acres at Barnstable
Municipal Airport. The land use change will allow the redevelopment of
a retail center on land that is not needed for aviation purposes. The
revenue generated by the lease of airport land for the retail center
will be placed into the airport's operation and maintenance fund.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 6, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the instructions on providing comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W 12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Interested persons may inspect the request and supporting documents
by contacting the FAA at the address listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jorge E. Panteli, Compliance and
Land Use Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration New England Region
Airports Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts,
01803. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts on September 24, 2019.
Gail B. Lattrell,
Director, ANE-600.
[FR Doc. 2019-21855 Filed 10-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32746-32747]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12208]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-1637-000]

UIL Distributed Resources, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
UIL Distributed Resources, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is June 6, 2016.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic

service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or
be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an
eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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>.

    Dated: May 16, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12208 Filed 5-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 20, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 20490]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08073]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-17-000]

Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request for Extension of
Time

    Take notice that on April 7, 2021, Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC
(Sabal Trail) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) grant an extension of time, until May 1, 2023, to install
two compressor units needed to complete Phase III of its Sabal Trail
Project, as authorized in the February 2, 2016 Order Issuing
Certificates and Approving Abandonment (February 2 Order).\1\ Ordering
Paragraph (F)(1) of the February 2 Order, as amended, provides a
deadline of May 1, 2021, for Sabal Trail to install these remaining two
compressor units and make them available for service.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Florida Southeast Connection, LLC, et al., 154 FERC ] 61,080
(2016) (February 2 Order), order on reh'g, Florida Southeast
Connection, LLC, et al., 156 FERC ] 61,160 (2016), order on remand,
Florida Southeast Connection, LLC, et al., 162 FERC ] 61,233 (2018).
    \2\ Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC, Letter Order Granting
Extension of Time, Docket No. CP15-17-000 (Jan 31, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sabal Trail states that, due to unforeseen delays in reaching full
commercialization of the project, additional time is now required in
order to complete the construction of the authorized project
facilities.
    This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment
period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on the applicant's
request for an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or
answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file 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
Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Only motions to intervene from entities that were party to
the underlying proceeding will be accepted. Algonquin Gas
Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 39 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on
requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural
Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order
issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,\4\ the
Commission will aim to issue an order acting on the request within 45
days.\5\ The Commission will address all arguments relating to whether
the applicant has demonstrated there is good cause to grant the
extension.\6\ The Commission will not consider arguments that re-
litigate the issuance of the certificate order, including whether the
Commission properly found the project to be in the public convenience
and necessity and whether the Commission's environmental analysis for
the certificate complied with the National Environmental Policy Act.\7\
At the time a pipeline requests an extension of time, orders on
certificates of public convenience and necessity are final and the
Commission will not re-litigate their issuance.\8\ The OEP Director, or
his or her designee, will act on all of those extension requests that
are uncontested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Contested proceedings are those where an intervenor disputes
any material issue of the filing. 18 CFR 385.2201(c)(1) (2019).
    \5\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
    \6\ Id. at P 40.
    \7\ Similarly, the Commission will not re-litigate the issuance
of an NGA section 3 authorization, including whether a proposed
project is not inconsistent with the public interest and whether the
Commission's environmental analysis for the permit order complied
with NEPA.
    \8\ Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC, 170 FERC ] 61,144, at P 40
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to Commission's Public Reference
Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning
the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on
March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments
in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. In
lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions
sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other
carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland
20852.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 29, 2021.

    Dated: April 14, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-08073 Filed 4-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P