MEMORANDUM TO THE DOCKET: 	References for Notice of Opportunity to Comment on a Methodology for Allocating Greenhouse Gas Emissions to a Combined Heat and Power Configuration under the Renewable Fuels Program

DATE: 					September 13, 2012

Some of the footnotes contained in "Notice of Opportunity to Comment on a Methodology for Allocating Greenhouse Gas Emissions to a Combined Heat and Power Configuration under the Renewable Fuels Program" referenced documents but did not contain hyperlinks to those documents.  This memo lists the relevant footnotes and gives the associated hyperlinks.

2 Jointly convened by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), Allocation of emissions from a Combined Heat and Power Plant, September 2006.
Available at: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools

5 Cogeneration: Proposed Approach for Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting. California Air Resources Board: Climate Change Reporting, Handout for ARB's GHG Technical Team Discussions, June 2007
Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccei/presentations/ARBCogenApproach.pdf

6 General Reporting Protocol, Version 1.1, The Climate Registry, May 2008
Available at: http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GRP.pdf

7 Jointly convened by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), Allocation of Emissions from a Combined Heat and Power Plant, September 2006.
Available at: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools

8 Jointly convened by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), Allocation of emissions from a Combined Heat and Power Plant, September 2006.
Available at: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools

9 The WCI Partner jurisdictions recognize the importance of combined heat and power (cogeneration) in the program scope and are continuing to evaluate its implications for the program design. Western Climate Initiative, Design Recommendations for the WCI Regional Cap-and-Trade Program. September 23, 2008, Corrected March 13, 2009.
Available at: http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org/component/remository/general/design-recommendations/Design-Recommendations-Section-2/

[10]British Standards Institute (BSI), PAS 2050: 2011, Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services, Section 8.5, Emissions from energy production using CHP.
Available at: http://www.bsigroup.com/upload/Standards%20&%20Publications/Energy/PAS2050.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28695-28696]
[FR Doc No: E9-14239]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0313; FRL-8919-8]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Critical Public Information Needs During Drinking
Water Emergencies (New); EPA ICR No. 2322.01, OMB Control No. 2080-NEW

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request for a new Information Collection Request (ICR) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Before submitting the ICR to OMB
for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
ORD-2009-0313 by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Research & Development Docket,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2009-0313. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Minamyer, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code NG-16, Environmental Protection Agency, 26
West Martin Luther King Drive; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments?

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2009-0313, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the ORD Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 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 Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the ORD Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified in this
document.

What Feedback Is EPA Particularly Interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected;
    (iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond

What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply to?

    Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
municipal water utility managers and members of the public
participating in focus groups.
    Title: Critical Public Information Needs during Drinking Water
Emergencies (New)
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2322.01, OMB Control No. 2080-NEW.
    ICR status: This ICR is for a new information collection activity.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: EPA is collecting this information as part of a formative
research study to identify critical information the public will need
from water utilities and other decision-makers during a crisis event
impacting drinking water. The research will probe consumers' and water
sector professionals' beliefs, opinions, and knowledge about water
security risks to assist public officials in planning effective crisis
communication strategies for such emergencies. Good communication can
rally support, calm fears, provide needed instructions, and encourage
cooperative behaviors.
    Study participants will also provide feedback on the effectiveness
of draft sample messages previously developed by EPA in consultation
with subject matter experts from water utilities, public health,
emergency response, law enforcement, and water trade/professional
organizations. Voluntary participants for this one-time study will
include water utility managers, public information officers, and
members of the public who consume drinking water supplied by water
utilities. Confidentiality of responses from respondents will be
assured by using an independent contractor to collect the information,
enacting procedures to prevent unauthorized access to respondent data,
and preventing public disclosure of the responses of individual
participants.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.7
hours per response. Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to: Review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 52 water utility
professional staff and 128 members of the public participating in focus
group discussions.
    Frequency of response: Once.
    Estimated total average number of burden hours for each respondent:
1 hour for water utility professional staff and 2 hours for members of
the public participating in focus group discussions.
    Estimated total annual respondent burden hours: 308 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $1,380.46. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $1,380.46 for participating water utility professional
staff and $0 for members of the public participating in focus group
discussions and an estimated cost of $0 for capital investment or
maintenance and operational costs.

What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: May 29, 2009.
Cynthia Sonich-Mullin,
Acting Director, National Homeland Security Research Center, Office of
Research and Development.
[FR Doc. E9-14239 Filed 6-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 164 (Thursday, August 23, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50921-50923]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20337]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0706]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Bay Bridge Load Transfer Safety Zone, San Francisco
Bay, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters of the San Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island, CA
in support of the Bay Bridge Load Transfer Safety Zone from August 1,
2012 through October 31, 2012. This safety zone is established to
protect mariners transiting the area from the dangers associated with
the load transfer operations. Unauthorized persons or vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the
safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port or their
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective with actual notice from August 1, 2012
through August 23, 2012. This rule is effective in the Code of Federal
Regulations from August 23, 2012 until October 31, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2012-0706. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to 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 rulemaking. 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 rule, call or email Ensign William Hawn, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector San Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.''
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with
respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM would be impracticable
and contrary to the public interest. The Coast Guard received
notification of the load transfer operations on July 17, 2012 and it

would be impracticable to publish an NPRM and receive public comment
before the commencement of the event. Because of the dangers posed by
transferring the load of the Bay Bridge from the temporary suspension
arrangement to the permanent suspension arrangement, the safety zone is
necessary to provide for the safety of mariners transiting the area.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the reasons stated above,
delaying the effective date would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed temporary rule is the Ports and
Waterways Safety Act which authorizes the Coast Guard to establish
safety zones (33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.).
    CALTRANS will sponsor the Bay Bridge Load Transfer Safety Zone on
August 1, 2012 through October 31, 2012, in the navigable waters of the
San Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island, CA. Load Transfer operations
are scheduled to take place from 12 a.m. on August 1, 2012 until 11:59
p.m. on October 31, 2012. The load transfer is necessary to facilitate
the completion of the Bay Bride construction project. The Bay Bridge is
constructed using a temporary suspension system that must be
transitioned to a permanent load-bearing system. The safety zone is
needed to establish a temporary limited access area on the waters
surrounding the load transfer operation. The safety zone is necessary
to protect mariners transiting the area from the dangers associated
with the load transfer of the Bay Bridge.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone in navigable waters
around and under the Bay Bridge within a box connected by the following
points: 37[deg]49'06'' N, 122[deg]21'17'' W; 37[deg]49'01'' N,
122[deg]21'12'' W; 37[deg]48'48'' N, 122[deg]21'35'' W; 37[deg]48'53''
N, 122[deg]21'40'' W (NAD 83) during the load transfer. Load transfer
operations are scheduled to take place from 12 a.m. on August 1, 2012
until 11:59 p.m. on October 31, 2012.
    The effect of the temporary safety zone will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the load transfer operation. Except for
persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no
person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule does not rise to the
level of necessitating a full Regulatory Evaluation. The safety zone is
limited in duration, and is limited to a narrowly tailored geographic
area. In addition, although this rule restricts access to the waters
encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be
significant because the local waterway users will be notified via
public Broadcast Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will
result in minimum impact. The entities most likely to be affected are
waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: owners and operators of waterfront
facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in
recreational activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels
are in the vicinity of the safety zone at times when this zone is being
enforced. This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: (i)
this rule will encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a
limited period of time, and (ii) the maritime public will be advised in
advance of this safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone of limited size and
duration. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-513 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-513  Safety zone; Bay Bridge Load Transfer Safety Zone,
San Francisco Bay, San Francisco, CA.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone is established in the
navigable waters of the San Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island,
California as depicted in National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) Chart 18650. The safety zone will encompass the
navigable waters of the San Francisco Bay within a box connected by the
following points: 37[deg]49'06'' N, 122[deg]21'17'' W; 37[deg]49'01''
N, 122[deg]21'12'' W; 37[deg]48'48'' N, 122[deg]21'35'' W;
37[deg]48'53'' N, 122[deg]21'40'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Enforcement Period. The zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be in effect from 12 a.m. on August 1, 2012 until 11:59
p.m. on October 31, 2012. The Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP)
will notify the maritime community of periods during which this zone
will be enforced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners in accordance with 33
CFR 165.7.
    (c) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting
the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zone.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in 33 CFR Part
165, Subpart C, entry into, transiting or anchoring within this safety
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-23A or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 30, 2012.
Cynthia L. Stowe,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2012-20337 Filed 8-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 43816-43817]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0070; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-14]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Mount Airy, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E Airspace at Mount Airy, NC, to
accommodate the additional airspace needed for the Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) developed for Mount Airy-Surry County
Airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 23, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On March 25, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class E airspace at Mount Airy,
NC (75 FR 14381) Docket No. FAA-2010-0070. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E
airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Mount Airy, NC to provide the controlled airspace
required to support the SIAPs for Mount Airy-Surry County Airport. This
action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations at
the airport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Mount Airy, NC.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed August 27, 2009, effective September 15, 2009, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700 Feet
or More Above the Surface of the Earth.
* * * * *

ASO NC E5 Mount Airy, NC [AMENDED]

Mount Airy-Surry County Airport, NC
    (Lat. 36[deg]27[min]35[sec] N., long. 80[deg]33[min]11[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 9-mile radius of the Mount Airy-Surry County Airport and
within 3.9 miles each side of the 353[deg] bearing from the airport
extending from the 9-mile radius to 15.3 miles north of the Mount
Airy-Surry County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 13, 2010.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2010-17948 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

	40 CFR Part 52

	[EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1009; FRL-         ]

	Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

	State of Delaware Transportation Conformity Regulations

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:  EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Delaware.  This revision establishes
the State’s transportation conformity requirements.  After they have
been approved, the State regulations will govern transportation
conformity determinations in the State of Delaware.  This action is
being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES:  Written comments must be received on or before [insert date 30
days from date of publication].

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number
EPA-R03-OAR-2007-1009 by one of the following methods:

     A.   www.regulations.gov.  Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.

     B.   E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     C.   Mail:  EPA- R03-OAR-2007-1009, Carol Febbo, Chief, Energy,
Radiation and Indoor Environment Branch, Mailcode 3AP23, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

     D.   Hand Delivery:  At the previously-listed EPA Region III
address.  Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket(s normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions:  Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-
R03-OAR-2007-1009.  EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change, and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.  Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or
e-mail.  The www.regulations.gov website is an (anonymous access(
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.  If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet.  If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit.  If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment.  Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.

Docket:  All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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
publicly available only in hard copy form.  Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.  Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Delaware Department of Natural Resources &
Environmental Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, Delaware
19903.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Martin Kotsch,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail

at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Throughout this document whenever ``we'',

``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What Is Transportation Conformity?

II. What Is the Background for This Action?

III. What Did the State Submit and How Did We Evaluate It?

IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is Transportation Conformity?

Transportation conformity is required under Section 176(c) of the Clean
Air Act to ensure that Federally supported highway, transit projects,
and other activities are consistent with (conform to) the purpose of the
SIP. Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated
nonattainment, and those redesignated to attainment after 1990
(maintenance areas), with plans developed under section 175A of the
Clean Air Act for the following transportation related criteria
pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide
(CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).  Conformity to the purpose of the SIP
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
the relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).  The
transportation conformity regulation is found in 40 CFR part 93 and
provisions related to conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR 51.390.

II. What Is the Background for This Action?

On August 10, 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was signed
into law.  SAFETEA-LU revised certain provisions of section 176(c) of
the Clean Air Act, related to transportation conformity.  Prior to
SAFETEA-LU, states were required to address all of the Federal
conformity rule's provisions in their conformity SIPs.   After
SAFETEA-LU, state’s SIPs were required to contain all or portions of
only the following three sections of the Federal rule, modified as
appropriate to each state's circumstances: 40 CFR 93.105 (consultation
procedures); 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) (written commitments to implement
certain kind of control measures); and 40 CFR 93.125(c) (written
commitments to implement certain kinds of mitigation measures).  States
are no longer required to submit conformity SIP revisions that address
the other sections of the Federal conformity rule.

III. What Did the State Submit and How Did We Evaluate It?

On July 9, 2007, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control (DNREC) submitted a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for Transportation Conformity purposes.  The
SIP revision consists of the State Regulation 1132, Delaware
Transportation Conformity Regulation.  This SIP revision addresses the
three provisions of the EPA Conformity Rule required under SAFETEA-LU:
40 CFR 93.105 (consultation procedures); 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii)
(control measures) and, 40 CFR 93.125(c) (mitigation measures).

We reviewed the submittal to assure consistency with the February 14,
2006 “Interim Guidance for Implementing the Transportation Conformity
provisions in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU).” The guidance document
can be found at  HYPERLINK "
http://epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm"
http://epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm .  The guidance
document states that each state is only required to address and tailor
the afore-mentioned three sections of the Federal Conformity Rule to be
included in their state conformity SIPs.

EPA's review of Delaware’s proposed SIP indicates that it is
consistent with EPA’s guidance in that it includes the three elements
specified by SAFETEA-LU.  Consistent with the EPA Conformity Rule at 40
CFR 93.105 (consultation procedures), Regulation 1132 (3) identifies the
appropriate agencies, procedures and allocation of responsibilities as
required under 40CFR 93.105 for consultation procedures.  In addition,
Regulation 1132(3) provides for appropriate public consultation/public
involvement consistent with 40 CFR 93.105.  With respect to the
requirements of 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 40 CFR 93.125(c), Regulation
1132(4) specifies that written commitments for control measures and
mitigation measures for meeting these requirements will be provided as
needed.

IV.	What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

EPA is proposing to approve the Delaware SIP revision for Transportation
Conformity, which was submitted on July 9, 2007.   This revision is
being proposed under a procedure called parallel processing, whereby EPA
proposes rulemaking action concurrently with the state's procedures for
amending its regulations.  If the proposed revision is changed in areas
other than those identified in this action, EPA will evaluate those
changes and may publish another notice of proposed rulemaking.  If no
changes are made, EPA will publish a Final Rulemaking Notice on the
revisions.  The final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the
SIP revision has been adopted by the State of Delaware and submitted
formally to EPA for incorporation into the SIP.  EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document.  These
comments will be considered before taking final action.

V.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.  For
this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
"Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).  This proposed action
merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under
state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).  This proposed
rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).  This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999).  This action merely proposes to approve a
state rule implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act.  This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks( (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal
standard.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA(s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.  In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS.  It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act.  Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule to approve
Delaware’s transportation conformity regulation does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Volatile organic
compounds.

Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

  October 29, 2007

Dated:
                \s\

           Donald S. Welsh,

Regional Administrator,

Region III.

 PAGE  9


[Federal Register: March 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 13364-13365]
[DOCID:fr15mr06-66]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-236-000]

Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of Tariff Filing

March 7, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 28, 2006, Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP
(Cove Point) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Original Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 12, to become effective
April 1, 2006.
    Cove Point states that the purpose of the filing is to adjust the
Transmission Electric Power rates applicable to Cove Point East
Shippers.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR

154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-3647 Filed 3-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


161-1 Hydrolysis

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at a nominal concentration of 0.25 (g a.i./ml,
was stable in HCL (pH=3) solution and NaOH (pH=11) solution in the dark
at 40(C for 31 days (Accession No. 071059).  The minor degradation
product 5-[2-chloro-4-trifluoromethylphenoxy-2-nitrobenzoic acid
(Compound II) was detected in the acidic solution.

161-2  Photodegradation in Water

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at a nominal concentration of  0.2 (g a.i./ml,
had a first-order half-life of 49 days in unbuffered distilled water
when irradiated with natural sunlight in England.  Fomesafen was stable
in the dark controls (Accession No. 071059).

No transformation products were identified except for unidentified polar
degradation products (24.5% of applied radioactivity) and non-polar
degradation products (11.1% of applied radioactivity).

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at a concentration of 0.10 mg a.i./L, had a
first-order half-life of 144.4 days (continuous light) or 289 days (12
hour photoperiod) in pH 7 buffer solution when irradiated with
UV-filtered xenon lamp for 14 days (MRID 40451101).  Fomesafen was
stable in the dark controls.  No degradation products were identified in
the study.

161-3 Photodegradation on Soil Surfaces

Radiolabeled fomesafen in the nitrophenyl and halophenyl moieties, at
500 g ai /ha, had a photodegradation half-life of 66 days in coarse
sandy loam soil irradiated under natural sunlight and temperature (8.1
to 21.80C).  No degradation was detected in the dark control.
Identified minor phototransformation products included
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulphonylanthranilamide
(fomesafen amine),
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoic acid (fosesafen
acid), and 5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzamide.
Unidentified non-polar compounds accounted for a maximum of 14% of
applied radioactivity.

162-1 Degradation in Soil

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 1 kg a.i./ha, had first order half-lives of 9
weeks (r2=0.8254) in 18 Acre sandy loam, 26.8 weeks  (r2=0.9549) in
Frensham loamy sand, and 49.9 weeks (r2=0.8919) in Gore silty clay loam
when incubated at 25(C at 40% soil water holding capacity (Accession No.
071059).  No degradation products except CO2 were identified.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 0.5 kg a.i./ha, had first order half-lives of
99 weeks (r2=0.9163) in 18 Acre sandy loam, 90.0 weeks  (r2=0.8882) in
Frensham loamy sand, 75.3 weeks (r2=0.9944) in Gore silty clay loam, and
29.7 weeks (r2=0.9476) in a Wisborough silty clay loam when incubated at
20(C at 40% soil water holding capacity (MRID 00135660).  Minor
degradation products were identified as
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoic acid and CO2.

162-2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 3.56 (g/g, in sand loam soil was incubated
under aerobic condition for 30 days followed by incubation under
anaerobic conditions for 29 days.  Fomesafen and its metabolites had a
half-life < 20 days in anaerobic soils (MRID 41181001).  During aerobic
incubation, fomesafen declined to 75% of the applied radioactivity.
Anaerobic degradation accounted for degradation to 20 to 28% of applied
radioactivity. Anaerobic degradation products were identified as the
fomesafen amine and fomesafen amino acid.

162-4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 1 kg a.i./ha, had a DT50 of  < 7 days in 18
Acre sandy loam soil when incubated under aerobic conditions at 25(C at
40% soil water holding capacity for 3 weeks followed by flood conditions
for 18 weeks (Accession No. 071059).  No total system half-lives could
be determined.  No degradation products except CO2 were identified.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 0.5 kg a.i./ha, had a first-order half-life
of 8.7 weeks in 18 Acre sandy loam soil, 19.9 weeks in Frensham loamy
sand soil, 13.2 weeks in Gore Hill calcareous clay loam soil, and 16.5
weeks in Wisborough Green silty clay loam soil when incubated under
flooded conditions at 20(C for 52 weeks (Accession No. 72158 and
259413).   The major degradation product was identified as
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N-methylsulphonylanthranilamide
(fomesafen amine).  Minor degradation products were identified as
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoic acid (fosesafen
acid), 5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy) anthranilic acid
(fomesafen amino acid) and CO2 were identified.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 0.5 kg a.i./ha, had a first-order half-life
of 8.7 weeks in 18 Acre sandy loam soil, 19.9 weeks in Frensham loamy
sand soil, 13.2 weeks in Gore Hill calcareous clay loam soil, and 16.5
weeks in Wisborough Green silty clay loam soil when incubated under
flooded conditions at 20(C for 52 weeks (MRID 40327301).  Major
degradation products were identified as
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-N- ethylsulphonylanthranilamide
(fomesafen amine).  Minor degradation products were identified as
5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy)-2-nitrobenzoic acid (fosesafen
acid), 5-(2-chloro-(,(,(-trifluoro-p-tolyloxy) anthranilic acid
(fomesafen amino acid) and CO2 were identified.

A study was conducted to assess whether fomesafen Schiff’s base was a
metabolite of fomesafen or an artifact of the analytical method.
Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 1.8 (g/g (5 kg a.i./ha) had a DT50 of  < 7
days (t1/2 = 4.4 days) in 18 Acres sandy loam soil when incubated under
flooded conditions at 20(C for 31 days.  Additionally, other treatments
included : 1.) soil treated with extraction solvent [acetonitrile and
HCl] and unlabeled fomesafen amine; 2.) soil treated with unlabeled
fomesafen prior to conventional extraction acetonitrile and HCl; and
soil treated with acetonitrile:HCl with radiolabeled (C13) formaldehyde
for MS analysis.  The study found that fomesafen degrades to the
fomesafen amine in flooded soils.  However, the formation of Schiff’s
base (interaction of amines with formaldehyde) was solely due to an
artifact in the extraction procedure.  The registrant recommends an
amine addition to limit the formation of Schiff’s base during soil
extraction.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 1 kg a.i./ha, had first-order a half-life in
soil of  4.2 weeks in 18 Acre sandy loam soil and 6.1 weeks in Frensham
loamy sand soil when incubated under flooded conditions for 18 weeks
(Accession No. 071059).   No degradation products except CO2 were
identified.

163-1 Batch Equilibrium and Soil Column Leaching

Radiolabed fomesafen, at a nominal concentrations of 10 to 50 mg a.i./kg
soil, had simple Kd soil-water partitioning coefficients of 0.68 in a
Blount silt loam, 1.91 in a Bryce silty clay loam, 0.51 in a Dickenson
loamy coarse sand,  1.51 in a Drummer silty clay loam, 1.00 in a
Flanagan silt loam, 0.93 in a Norfolk coarse sandy loam, 0.38 in a
Onarga coarse sand,  0.88 in a Peotone silty clay loam,  1.04 in a Plano
silt loam, 1.30 in a Terrarosa sandy clay, 1.51 in a Brazilian 1B sandy
clay loam, and 2.45 in a Peartree sandy clay loam (Accession No.
259413).

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 3 mg a.i./kg, in sandy clay soil and and
sandy loam soil was incubated under anaerobic conditions in the dark at
20(C for 47 days (MRID 40361703). Subsamples of the incubated soil were
further incubated under anaerobic conditions for 35 days to facilitate
formation of the fomesafen amine.   Following incubation, soil samples
were placed on top of replicated soil columns and then leached with 0.01
M CaCl2 solution.  Major degradation products in the aged soil samples
of fomesafen were  fomesafen amine and fomesafen amino acid.  Minor
degradation products were fomesafen nitro acid and fomesafen Schiff’s
base.  The majority of radiolabeled residues (92 to 96.4%) were detected
in the 0-5 cm section of soil.  Radioactivity in leachate samples
accounted for 0.05% to 0.06% of applied radioactivity.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at 0.5 kg a.i./ha, in a German and three UK
soils were incubated under aerobic conditions for 3 weeks at 20(C
(Accession No. 150555).  After incubation, each incubated soil was
placed on top of seven packed soil columns per soil type.   Soil columns
were leached with 30 ml aliquots of 0.01 M CaCl2 solution for a total of
9 weeks (equivalent of 661 mm of rain).  Radiolabeled fomesafen residues
were detected throughout the soil columns.  Leachate samples generally
contained less than < 0.3% of applied radioactivity with the exception
of one sample with 15 to 17% of applied radioactivity in a coarse sand
soil.

Time dependent partitioning of  radiolabeled fomesafen, at 0.2 (g/g, was
determined in sand loam and silty clay soil slurries during a 16 week
equilibration under two different conductions: 1.) soil slurries were
incubated at 20(C in darkness and 2.) soils slurries subjected to
successive wetting/drying cycles (MRID 45048207).  Time dependent
soil-water partition (Kd) coefficients at 20(C were: 0.77 at time 0 and
1.09 to 2.31 during the 16 week equilibration period in a sandy loam
soil ; and  2.84 at time 0 and 4.72 to 7.75 during the 16 week
equilibration period in a silty clay loam.  Time dependent soil water
partition (Kd) coefficients in successive wetting/drying cycles were:
1.15 at time 0 and 1.46 to 2.05 during a 16 week equilibration period in
sandy loam soil; and, 4.85 at time 0 and 5.79 to 7.59 during a 16 week
equilibration period in silty clay soil.

The mobility of radiolabeled fomesafen, at 2 kg/ha, was evaluated using
thin layer chromatography (TLC) for 13 soils from the United States,
Brazil, and United Kingdom (Accession No. 071059; MRID 00110509).
Atrazine was used as a reference standard for assessing mobility in 0.01
M CaCl2 eluent.   Fomesafen was as mobile to twice as mobile as atrazine
in US and UK soils.  However, fomesafen was less mobile than atrazine in
soils from Brazil.  The researchers believe the low mobility of
fomesafen in Brazilian soils is due the presence of Fe oxides.

164-1 Field Dissipation

Fomesafen, applied at 0.56 kg a.i./ha (0.5 lbs a.i./A), had field
dissipation half-lives of  80.6 days in the NC,  133 days in IL and 55.5
days in MS (MRID 40644401).  Fomesafen amine was detected in surface
soil (0-5 cm) at concentrations of 0.01 mg/kg in the NC and IL field
sites.  Fomesafen was detected to a soil depth of 40 cm in NC,  30 cm in
IL, and 60-70 cm in MS.

Radiolabeled fomesafen, applied at 0.28, dissipated with a half-life of
8 to 16 weeks in a MS silt loam soil (MRID 40327308).  Radiolabeled
residues were predominately detected in the surface soil (0-7 inches);
however, radiolabeled residues were detected as deep as 19 to 22 inches.
 Parent fomesafen comprised 23.5% of the residues in the surface soil.
Degradation products of fomesafen were identified as fomesafen amine
(3.2% of applied),  fomesafen nitro acid (0.8% of applied), and
fomesafen amino acid (1.1% of applied).

Following the application of fomesafen (REFLEX,  2 lb ai/gal, SC/L) at
0.25 or 0.5 lb ai/A to soybeans, fomesafen dissipated from the surface
6 inches of soil with half-lives of approximately 50 days in silty clay
loam (AR, LA, MO), silt loam (AR, LA, MO, IL), clay (AR, TX), loam (IN)
soils , and approximately 50 to 150 days in silty clay loam (LA, MO),
silt loam (AR, AL, LA, IL), clay (AR), clay loam (MS), silty clay (MS),
sandy clay loam (IN), and sandy loam (MI) soils (MRID 40327302,
40327303, 40327304).  At the NC site (loam soil), the half-life of
fomesafen residues ranged from 337 to 385 days in 1985 and < 56 days in
1983.  Fomesafen residues were ( 0.08 ppm at soil depths of 6 to 12
inches.

Reviewer Comment- Data are deemed unacceptable because the analytical
method was not provided for 15 of the 22 sites (MRID 40327305, 40327306,
40327307).  Also, there were insufficient sampling protocol to establish
a clear pattern of decline and at 4 sites the data were too variable to
assess dissipation.  The reviewer is reporting these data as ancillary
information on relative rates of fomesafen dissipation in the United
States.

Following the application of fomesafen (formulation unspecified) at 0.5
lbs ai/A to soybeans, fomesafen residues dissipated from the upper 2
inches of soil with half-lives of < 30 days in GA sand and AR silt loam
soils , 50-91 days in IL silt loam soil,  120 –265 days in LA silty
clay loam soils, and < 126 days loamy sand (NC, AL, and LA ), sandy
loams (IA and NC),  silt loam (KY, IN, IL, MO, MS), clay loam (IA), clay
(NC).  Half-lives could not be estimated from sites in Geneseo, IL;
Hills, MN; Sioux Falls, SD; and Thomastown, LA because the data were too
variable.  After 232 to 342 days, fomesafen residues were predominately
detected in the surface soil (0-6 inch) samples.  Fomesafen residues
were detected to a depth of 20 to 30 inches.

Fomesafen residues dissipated from the 0-to-6 inch depth of fallow field
plots located in Goldsboro, NC, Vicksburg, MS, Champaign, IL and White
Health, IL treated with fomesafen at 1.0 lb ai/A with half-lives of < 42
days, <33 days, and <22 days, respectively (Accession No. 259413).
Residues were ( 0.04 ppm at soil depths of 6 to 24 inches at any
sampling interval.

165-4 Bioaccumulation in Fish

Radiolabeled fomesafen, at exposure nominal concentrations of 1 mg/L,
had a bioconcentration factor of 0.7 for whole fish, 0.2 for edible
tissue, and 5.2 for nonedible tissue after a 14 day exposure period
(MRID 00150555).   After a 14 day depuration period, total radiolabeled
residues in fish tissues decreased by 95% of the 7 day accumulation
concentrations.  Residues in fish tissues were not identified.

166-1 Prospective Ground Water Monitoring Study

Fomesafen, applied at 0.5 lb a.i./A, had a field dissipation half-life
of 32.4 days from surface soils (0-4 inches) in an agricultural field of
Kenansville loamy sand cropped with soybeans in Wayne County, NC (MRID
42247001).  One  route of dissipation for fomesafen was leaching.
Fomesafen movement through soil was detected from suction lysimeters;
fomesafen was detected in soil pore water at 2 months at 17 ug/L and at
1 ug/L in the 6-ft and  9-ft lysimeters at 3 months and 4 months,
respectively.   Maximum concentrations of fomesafen in suction
lysimeters were 33 ug/L (3 months posttreatment), 12 ug/L (7 months),
and 5 ug/L (8, 10, 11, and 12 months).  The shallow wells were dry
during the study.  Fomesafen was detected at 1 ug/L in the medium and
deep-depth monitoring wells.

  FILENAME  Appendix A Environmental Fate Studies 		A-  PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 28, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24393-24395]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10969]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0651; FRL-9994-14-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; GA; Miscellaneous Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes
to the Georgia State Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise Georgia's
rules regarding emissions standards and open burning. EPA is approving
portions of the SIP revision submitted by the State of Georgia, through
the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection
Division (GA EPD) on April 11, 2003. This action is being taken
pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This rule will be effective June 27, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0651. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information 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 publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, (formerly known as
the Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960, or Joel Huey, Air
Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached by telephone at
(404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mr. Huey
can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On April 11, 2003, GA EPD submitted a SIP revision to EPA for
approval that involves changes to Georgia's SIP regulations. In this
action, EPA is approving the portions of the Georgia submission that
make changes to Georgia's Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn)--NOX Emissions from
Large Stationary Gas Turbines and Rule 391-3-1-.02(5)--Open Burning.\1\
EPA is not acting on the following three other portions of GA EPD's
April 11, 2003, submittal at this time. On October 21, 2009, GA EPD
submitted a letter withdrawing from the submittal a proposed revision
to Georgia Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(qqq)--Volatile Organic Compound From
Extruded Polystyrene Products Manufacturing Utilizing a Blowing
Agent.\2\ On January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1206), EPA approved changes to Rule
391-3-1-.01--Definitions that were included in the April 11, 2003,
submittal. On April 16, 2018 (83 FR 16276), EPA published a proposed
rulemaking for Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)--Permit by Rule Standards that
was included in the April 11, 2003, submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On August 31, 2018, GA EPD submitted a letter (included in
the docket for this action) withdrawing from the submittal a
proposed revision to Georgia Rule 391-3-1-.02(5)(d) that would
provide exceptions to the 40 percent opacity limit on open burning.
    \2\ The October 21, 2009, letter is included in the docket for
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on February 12,
2019 (84 FR 3354), EPA proposed to approve Georgia's Miscellaneous
Revisions. The details of Georgia's submission and the rationale for
EPA's action are explained in the NPRM. Comments on the proposed
rulemaking were due on or before March 14, 2019. EPA received no
comments on the proposed action.

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, 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 Georgia's
Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn)--NOX Emissions from Large Stationary Gas
Turbines, effective April 20, 2003, which adds exemptions for emission
standards for certain electric generating units, and Georgia Rule 391-
3-1.02(5)--Open Burning, also effective April 20, 2003,\3\ which adds,
clarifies and removes several types of activities to the open burning
exception list, revises specific county restrictions and removes the
prohibition on open burning during an air pollution episode. EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please
contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information
Contact'' section of this preamble for more information). Therefore,
these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State
implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are 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 in the next update to the SIP compilation.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The effective date of the change to Rule 391-3-1-.02(5) made
in Georgia's April 11, 2003, SIP revision is April 20, 2003.
However, for purposes of the state-effective date at 40 CFR
52.570(c), that change to Georgia's rule is captured and superseded
by Georgia's update in a November 6, 2006 (state-effective July 13,
2006), SIP revision, which EPA previously approved on February 9,
2010 (75 FR 6309).
    \4\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the Georgia SIP
found in Georgia Rules 391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn) and 391-3-1.02(5) submitted
on April 11, 2003. For the reasons explained in EPA's February 12, 2019
NPRM (84 FR 3354), EPA has concluded that these changes are consistent
with the CAA and its implementing regulations, and will not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section 7501 of the Act). See 42 U.S.C.
7410(l).

IV. 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. 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     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 July 29, 2019. 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. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: May 14, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Acting 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 L--Georgia

0
2. In Sec.  52.570, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entries ``391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn)'' and ``391-3-1-.02(5)'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.570   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA Approved Georgia Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Emission Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn)..............  NOX Emissions from        4/20/2003  5/28/2019, [insert
                                    Large Stationary                     Federal Register
                                    Gas Turbines.                        citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
391-3-1-.02(5)...................  Open Burning.......       7/13/2006  5/28/2019, [insert   Except subparagraph
                                                                         Federal Register     391-3-1-.02(5)(c),
                                                                         citation].           which was approved
                                                                                on July 10, 2001,
                                                                                with a state-
                                                                                effective date of
                                                                                August 16, 2000.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-10969 Filed 5-24-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


EPAlFluoropolymer Industry Meeting .,`),".~ WI1 . `, b* r . .

I Introductions I Meeting Purpose I Introduction to the Fluoropolymer (FP) Industry I Fluorinated Processing Aids (APFO/ PFOA) in Fluoropolymers I Qiscussion & Feedback Meeting Purpose ,, 2 "I I Provide Overview of FP Industry I Who, What, How, Critical Uses 1 Open Communication Channels I Describe What Industry Is Doing I Determine EPA Expectations & Plans I Regulatory Actions I International Coordination I Discuss Next Steps Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) Fluoropolymer Manufacturers Group WW. _ ."..".` L I A Special Purpose Committee of the SPI I The mission of the FMG is to promote the continued safe manufacture & use of fluoropolymers made using fluorinated polymerization aides (FPA) while establishing & supporting responsible care in the use of fluoropolymer products & minimizing the impact on the environment FMG Objectives for Meeting w j ". .

I Illustrate Necessity of the Continuing Safe Use of APFO I Demonstrate Industry's Safety & Health Awareness I Identify EPA Concerns 1 I e FMG Members ~. I "_,~, j"_ j *nll .> I`. ** 1xs "a,( ":`* a I Asahi Glass Fluoropolymers I Atofina I Ausimont I Daikin I DuPont & DuPont/ Dow Elastomers I Dyneon (a 3M Company)

Fluoropolymers & PFO Chemistry I APFO Vs. PFOS Chemistry I PFOS  Part of the Product Being Sold I APFO  Processing Aid, Not Intended to Be in Product I Production Volume Comparisons I PFOS  Thousands of Tons (Millions of Pounds) I APFO  Tens of Tons (Thousands of Pounds) I Dispersive Vs. Non dispersive Uses I PFOS  Spray Applications for Consumer Products (Dispersive by Design) I APFO  Traces in End use Products (Non dispersive)

3 Importance of Fluoropolymers to Society/ Commerce ,_, < ,** ,, 1* 5 , .W. Y` , h :.`^

I What are Fluoropolymers I PTFE (Granular, Fine Powder, Dispersion, Micropowders) I Thermoplastic Fluoropolymers (FEP, PFA, ETFE, THV, PVDF, etc.) I Fluoroelastomers (including PFE)

I Building Blocks: I TFE I HFP I VDF I I Olefins I Fluoro Vinyl Ethers Importance of Fluoropolymers in Society .q. :` R I Fluoropolymer Markets I $2.5 Billion of FP Sales = $10 25 Billion in Industries Dependent on FP End Products I Aerospace/ Military I Automobiles/ Transportation/ Off Road I Chemical/ Petrochemical Processing Equipment I Computers/ Semiconductors I Medical Devices I Power Generation Pollution Control I Telecommunications Importance of Fluoropolymers In Critical Applications I Fuel Barrier Hoses, Connectors & Seals I Drive Train Seals I Hydraulic & Refrigeration Seals I High Performance Lubricants I Filtration Products (Bag Houses Etc) I Wire & Cable Insulation (LAN Networks, Automotive, Aerospace, Etc.) I Semiconductor Chip Manufacturing Equipment I Pipe &Tank Liners I Pump Seals, Liners, Packing I Tubing in Medical/ measurement/ aerospace Devices I Protective Clothing I Protective Coatings on Metal I Etc.

Global Industry Organization I Association of Plastic Manufacturers in Europe (APME) I The Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) I Fluoropolymer Manufacturers Group (FW I Canadian Plastics Industry Association (CPIA) I Contacts/ inclusion of OECD : l Status of SPIIAPME ES& H Programs ._ I ,* M**_." C, ., ,,

II Toxicology I APME APFO Tox Program Ongoing for Over 3 Years I APME Product Stewardship & Worker Safety & Health Programs I Epidemiology  Limited Use Locations With Good Worker Medical Histories I Lifecycle Management I Need to Gather & Understand Additional Residual & Exposure Data I I Fully Determine Where It Goes I I Decide How Release & Exposure Can Be Further Reduced (Continued)

Status of SPIIAPME ES& H Programs (continued)

I Environmental Impacts I Committed to Minimizing Environmental Impact I Source Reduction I Investigate Recovery, Recycle & Re use I Committed to Preventing Exposure & Avoiding Any Human Health Effects I Replacement or Alternate Technology? I Repeated Attempts but No Success 6 Group Discussion Questions/ Feedback/ Timelines 7


[Federal Register: May 25, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 101)]
[Notices]
[Page 30337-30338]
[DOCID:fr25my11-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2111-000.
    Applicants: EQT Energy, LLC, EQT Corporation, Big Sandy Pipeline,
LLC.
    Description: Joint Petition of Big Sandy Pipeline, et al. for
Waiver of Capacity Release Regulations.
    Filed Date: 05/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110513-5154.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, May 25, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2112-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Hot Spring Lateral Recourse Rates--CP10-471 Compliance, to
be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5074.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2113-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Hot Spring Lateral Agreements--CP10-471 Compliance to be
effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2114-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.

    Description: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C. submits tariff filing
per 154.204: KGen Hot Spring Agreements to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/17/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110517-5076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2115-000.
    Applicants: Honeoye Storage Corporation.
    Description: Honeoye Storage Corporation submits tariff filing per
154.204: PAL Services to be effective 7/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/18/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110518-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-2116-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC submits
tariff filing per 154.204: Staten Island Heater Facility--Negotiated
Rate Amendments to be effective 5/20/2011.
    Filed Date: 05/19/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110519-5034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 31, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 19, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-12879 Filed 5-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P