[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60838-60839]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25756]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC19-27-000.
    Applicants: IIF US Holding LP, IIF US Holding 2 LP.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of IIF US Holding LP, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5234.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/7/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG19-23-000.
    Applicants: Antelope DSR 3, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of EWG Status of Antelope
DSR 3, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: EG19-24-000.
    Applicants: San Pablo Raceway, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of EWG Status of San
Pablo Raceway, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER10-2630-002; ER16-1914-002.
    Applicants: NGP Blue Mountain I LLC, Patua Acquisition Company,
LLC.
    Description: Supplement to September 27, 2018 Notice of Non-
Material Change in Status of NGP Blue Mountain I LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5239.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2738-006.
    Applicants: The Empire District Electric Company.
    Description: Supplement to June 29, 2018 Updated Market Power
Analysis of The Empire District Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5264.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-360-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Company LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Abandoned Plant
Incentive Rate Treatment of American Transmission Company LLC.

    Filed Date: 11/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20181116-5232.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-361-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
International Transmission Company, Michigan Electric Transmission
Company, LLC, ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2018-11-19_Attachment O Compliance
for ITC Companies re Transco Adder (EL18-140) to be effective 4/20/
2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-362-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ALLETE,
Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-19_SA 3211 MP-GRE IA
(Birch Lake) to be effective 11/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-363-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., ALLETE,
Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-19_SA 3212 MP-GRE
ICA (Bergen Lake) to be effective 11/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-364-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Happy Hollow Solar Center
LGIA Filing to be effective 11/5/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-365-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PSCo-WAPA-TSGT Inter-
Entitle-O&M-367-Exh O-0.1.0 to be effective 11/20/2018.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-366-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-11-19 Att N-LGIP--Xcel
Queue Reform to be effective 2/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/19/18.
    Accession Number: 20181119-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/10/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 19, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25756 Filed 11-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47552-47557]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19580]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 563

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0099]
RIN 2127-AL14

Event Data Recorders

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: On August 5, 2011, the agency published a final rule amending
the requirements for voluntarily installed event data recorders (EDRs)
established in August 2006. In response to the August 2011 final rule,
the agency received three petitions for reconsideration from the
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the Automotive Safety Council,
and Honda Motor Co., LTD. The Association of Global Automakers, Inc.
Technical Affairs Committee, and Nissan North America, Inc. both
submitted comments in support of the petitioners' requests. After
careful consideration, the agency is granting some aspects of the
petitions, and denying others. This document amends the final rule
accordingly.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendments in this rule are effective
October 9, 2012.
    Compliance Dates: Except as provided below, light vehicles
manufactured on or after September 1, 2012 that are equipped with an
EDR and manufacturers of those vehicles must comply with this rule.
However, vehicles that are manufactured in two or more stages or that
are altered are not required to comply with the rule until September 1,
2013. Voluntary compliance is permitted before that date.
    Petitions: If you wish to submit a petition for reconsideration of
this rule, your petition must be received by September 24, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket
number and be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, 4th
Floor, Washington, DC 20590. Please see the Privacy Act heading under
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues,
contact:
    David Sutula, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, NVS-112.
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal issues, contact: David Jasinski, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC-112. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Both persons may be reached by mail at the following address: National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration
III. Analysis and Agency Decision
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Background

    In August 2006, NHTSA issued a final rule \1\ amending 49 CFR part
563 (Part 563) to establish uniform performance requirements for the
accuracy, collection, storage, survivability, and retrievability of
onboard motor vehicle crash EDRs voluntarily installed in light
passenger vehicles. Specifically, the regulation applies to passenger
cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 3,855 kg (8,500 pounds) or less and an
unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg (5,500 pounds) or less,\2\ that are
voluntarily equipped with an EDR. The 2006 final rule aimed to
standardize the data obtained through EDRs so that such data would
provide information to enhance the agency's understanding of crash
events and safety system performance, thereby potentially contributing
to safer vehicle designs and more effective safety regulations. The
2006 final rule was intended to be technology-neutral, so as to permit
compliance with any available EDR technology that meets the specified
performance requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 71 FR 50998.
    \2\ Walk-in van-type trucks or vehicles designed to be sold
exclusively to the U.S. Postal Service are excluded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 14, 2008,\3\ the agency responded to petitions for
reconsideration on the August 2006 final rule, and made the following
amendments to Part 563:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 73 FR 2168.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Clarified the event storage definitions to alleviate any
uncertainties in multiple event crashes;
     Revised certain sensor ranges and accuracies to reflect
current state of the art technologies;
     Clarified the recorded data reporting format;
     Specified vehicle storage conditions during compliance
testing;
     Clarified the required data elements and scope of covered
sensors; and
     Revised the effective date to provide sufficient time for
manufacturers and suppliers to comply with the rule.

The agency made these changes to encourage a broad application of EDR
technologies in motor vehicles and maximize the usefulness of EDR data
for vehicle designers, researchers, and the medical community, without
imposing unnecessary burdens or deterring future improvements to EDRs
that have been voluntarily installed. The 2008 final rule also provided
two additional years of lead time to provide manufacturers more time to
implement the necessary changes to EDR architectures within their
normal product development cycles.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ NHTSA issued a Federal Register notice on February 8, 2008
(73 FR 8408) to correct the placement of decimal points for data in
Table II of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 5, 2011,\5\ the agency published a final rule responding
to three petitions for reconsideration and made the following
clarifications and amendments to Part 563:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 76 FR 47478.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Removed the required standardization of the reporting
requirements for all acceleration data requirements to address
certification issues with data clipping, filtering and phase-shifting;
     Clarified the application of sensor tolerances to within
the range of the applicable sensor;
     Clarified our position regarding exclusion of peripheral
sensors from the reporting requirements for EDRs;
     Clarified the event storage definition to alleviate
uncertainties in multiple event crashes;
     Revised requirements for the capture of event data in
crashes that:

    [cir] Involve side or side curtain/tube air bags such that EDR data
would only need to be locked if the vehicle also captures lateral
delta-V data, and
    [cir] Involve non-reversible deployable restraints other than
frontal, side or side/curtain tube air bags such that EDR data would
not need to be locked at the option of the manufacturer,
     Clarified that any non-reversible deployable restraint may
serve as an event trigger;
     Revised the minimum range requirement for the ``Steering
input'' data element from an angular basis to a percentage basis; and
     Made other minor technical and editorial corrections.
    In response to the 2011 final rule, the agency received three
petitions for reconsideration \6\ from the Alliance of Automobile
Manufacturers (Alliance), the Automotive Safety Council \7\ (ASC), and
Honda Motor Co., LTD (Honda). The Association of Global Automakers,
Inc. Technical Affairs Committee (GAM), and Nissan North America, Inc.
(Nissan) both submitted comments in support of the petitioners'
requests. After careful consideration, the agency is granting some
aspects of the petitions, and denying others. This document amends the
final rule accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Docket number: NHTSA-2011-0106.
    \7\ Formerly the ASC was known as the Automotive Occupant
Restraints Council.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Petitions for Reconsideration

A. Steering Input

    Based on a petition for reconsideration from Bosch, the 2011 final
rule modified the format and range of the steering input data element
in Table III from a range of -250 degrees clockwise (CW) to 250 degrees
counterclockwise (CCW) with a resolution specification of 1 percent to
a percentage of the lock-to-lock steering wheel angle of
100 percent with a 1 percent range. The Alliance and Honda petitioned
the agency to revert the range specification to the original range of -
250 degrees clockwise (CW) to 250 degrees counterclockwise (CCW) with a
resolution specification of 5 degrees. In its petition the Alliance
stated that steering wheel angle sensors report the actual steering
wheel angle in degrees. In order for the EDR to report the steering
input in percent, the EDR module would need to have information about
the vehicle's total lock-to-lock steering wheel angle capability.
However, the total lock-to-lock steering wheel angle may vary not only
from one vehicle model to another, but also within a vehicle trim line.
    The Alliance added that the same vehicle trim line with a different
suspension package or gear box also might have a different total lock-
to-lock angle and each vehicle line would need to be specifically
calibrated in order for the EDR to report steering input as a
percentage based on that vehicle's steering wheel rotation capability.
The Alliance went on to state that implementing the new EDR requirement
to report steering input in percent would impose an unnecessary complex
proliferation of EDR calibrations to match vehicle builds.
    Honda noted that in addition to the variability both between and
within vehicle trim lines, steering angle sensors simply detect and
display the actual rotation angle of the steering wheel and do not
detect if the steering wheel is in the locked position. Honda stated
that it could not report steering input as a percentage value without
drastic changes to vehicle steering system design and incorporation of
new steering angle sensors. Both Nissan and GAM submitted comments in
support of the Alliance and Honda petitions to reinstate the original
input range to -250 degrees CW to 250 degrees CCW with a resolution
specification of 5 degrees.

    Bosch has submitted a letter in support of the Honda and Alliance
petitions for reconsideration expressing its agreement with the
petitioners' arguments.\8\ In its letter and in an ex-parte meeting
with the agency, Bosch reiterated the other petitioners' concerns that
the data element change may require additional calibration and software
changes. It noted that the majority of electronic stability control
(ESC) systems utilize steering input information in degrees, not
percentages. It stated that manufacturers may not have enough time to
implement this change, and as a result may have to remove the steering
wheel angle data from the EDR log.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SAE International (SAE) submitted to the 2011 final rule docket
what they described as a technical amendment to the steering input
parameter. Its submission supports a return to the reporting of a
 250 degrees steering wheel angle. However, it indicated
that the sign convention for the direction of rotation should be
reversed such that it should be reported as 250 degrees CW to -250
degrees CCW. It indicated that a CW positive sign is consistent with a
Z axis down (into the steering wheel) philosophy explained in SAE
Recommended Practice J670, ``Vehicle Dynamics Terminology,'' and well
as the philosophy being used to update the EDR parameter definitions in
SAE Recommended Practice J1698-1, ``Event Data Recorder--Output Data
Definition.''
    Finally, SAE additionally requested that the accuracy of this data
element be modified from  5 percent to the larger of  5 degrees or  5 percent of the reading. SAE stated
that this change would add clarity to the accuracy specification while
assuring that it is not too small for small steering angles.

B. Data Clipping Flag

    All three petitioners requested that the agency consider delaying
the requirement that an EDR must flag the first occurrence of input
that saturates or clips the sensor. The Alliance and Honda agreed with
the agency's intention to record the timing of when the design range of
a sensor is exceeded. However, each petitioner commented that it would
be too difficult to complete the necessary system programming within
the 12-month interval between the August 5, 2011 final rule and the
September 1, 2012 effective date of Part 563. Honda requested the
agency delay this requirement for 1 year, while the Alliance and GAM
requested a 2-year delay.
    Honda stated that given the extensive ramifications of a software
modification, they investigated the feasibility of detecting the time
of a data clipping occurrence through the data retrieval tool. They
stated that the result of this investigation indicated that it is not
feasible to accurately capture the time of data clipping due to the low
frequency in which the EDR records the data that is available for
imaging by the tool (100 Hz).

C. End of Event Time

    The Alliance commented that the revisions to the ``End of event
time'' definition to be based on the resultant vehicle delta-V will
affect both the data reporting requirements and the capture and storage
requirements for EDRs. The ASC noted that this change could require a
real-time calculation to determine when the resultant has been met
under all conditions. Both the Alliance and the ASC noted that this may
result in changes to the EDR software and require evaluation prior to
implementation. Honda noted that certain strategies would determine the
end of event when both the lateral and the longitudinal delta-V fall
below the 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) limit. In this case, the end of event
determined by the EDR algorithm may be marginally earlier than
specified in Part 563. The Alliance and Honda proposed that the agency
consider revising the end of event definition as follows:

    End of event time means the moment at which (1) the cumulative
longitudinal delta-V within a 20 ms time period becomes 0.8 km/h
(0.5 mph) or less, and (2) for vehicles that record ``delta-V
lateral'', the cumulative lateral delta-V within a 20 ms time period
becomes 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) or less, or (3) the crash detection
algorithm of the air bag control unit resets.

    The GAM supported both the Alliance and Honda petitions to make
this change to the end of event time definition.

D. Occupant Size Classification

    Both the Alliance and Honda requested clarification on the
revisions to the occupant size classifications definition. They stated
that the current definition is misleading in that it may now include
the 5th percentile female (as defined in 49 CFR part 572, subpart O) in
the same category as an adult, particularly in the driver's designated
seating position. The GAM supported the Alliance and Honda petitions.
The petitioners requested that the agency clarify if, in fact, it
intended to include 5th percentile females in the larger occupant
category.

E. Non-Reversible Deployable Restraints

    The Alliance and ASC petitioned the agency to clarify the
requirements for data capture by EDRs in events utilizing non-
reversible deployable restraints other than air bags. They stated their
belief that the agency intended to allow capture and recording of
deployments of devices such as pretensioners at the option of the
manufacturer, but that the current regulatory text in 49 CFR 563.9(b)
does not specify this optional nature. The ASC asked for clarification
on whether or not such non-reversible restraint deployments would be
required to be locked. The GAM supported the Alliance petition, and
recommended that the agency adopt the Alliance proposal to codify the
optional nature of non-air bag, non-reversible restraint deployments.

F. Multi Event Storage

    The ASC requested clarification on the locking of events involving
side impact air bags. It commented that the regulatory text \9\ could
be interpreted to mean that if a side impact deployment occurs first,
it would be locked and a subsequent secondary frontal air bag
deployment would not be recorded. It further suggested that this would
not be in keeping with the agency's intent to record frontal air bag
deployments. The GAM supported the ASC request for clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 49 CFR 563.9, Data capture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Technical Workshop

    Honda and GAM requested that the agency consider holding a
technical workshop to ensure that all stakeholders are properly
prepared to comply with Part 563 given the myriad complex issues and
iterations of the regulation. GAM added that such an exchange would aid
in resolving any additional technical issues in the most expeditious
manner possible.

H. Compliance Test Procedures

    Honda, ASC, and GAM urged the agency to publish a compliance test
procedure for Part 563 as soon as possible. Without a test procedure,
they noted that it will be very difficult to maintain consistent and
reliable compliance across the industry. The ASC added that NHTSA
should harmonize the test procedure for Part 563 with the appropriate
test procedures for the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
recommended practices.

III. Analysis and Agency Decision

A. Steering Input

    Steering input with respect to Part 563 is an optional data element
used to determine the driver's intent prior to a crash. In its petition
for reconsideration of the 2008 final rule, Bosch commented that the
Table III accuracy and resolution requirements for the steering input
data element are inconsistent with other data elements. It recommended
that the agency revise the range definition for this data element to
 100 percent. In response, the agency revised the minimum
range requirement for the ``Steering input'' data element from -250
degrees CW to 250 degrees CCW to a value of  100 percent in
Table III in the 2011 final rule. We stated we agreed with Bosch that
this change would be more consistent with the accuracy and resolution
requirements being expressed as percentages. We also believed the
change would better address state-of-the-art active steering systems
where the steering wheel angle and tire position may not correlate.
    In consideration of the Alliance and Honda petitions for
reconsideration of the 2011 final rule on the issue of steering input
and the supporting information subsequently provided by Bosch, we are
now reverting back to the steering input data element range of -250
degrees CW to 250 degrees CCW that was in the 2008 final rule. The
change to the range made in the 2011 final rule was not intended to add
unnecessary complexity to the vehicle's EDR. At the time of our earlier
decision, we agreed with the need for desired consistency with other
data elements (such as throttle and accelerator pedal position) and
Bosch's petition for this change did not speak to the vehicle trim line
implications and the complexities that would result.
    We are not making this change in response to comments suggesting
that the rule would require drastic changes in steering design. We
believe that the reporting of angle as a percentage of full lock to the
tolerance required could be implemented by a software change in the
download tool and knowledge of the full lock angle for the vehicle
make/model.
    At the time of our analysis for the 2011 final rule, the majority
of EDR data collected did not include steering input in the vehicle
pre-crash data set. As a result, the agency had little practical
experience with manufacturer plans for use of the voluntary steering
input data element. However, after reviewing more recent EDR crash data
where the pre-crash steering input was captured, we believe the
original steering input range measured in degrees may be a more
practical indicator. While the same information could be obtained from
a percentage value, this would require knowledge of the number of
degrees to fully lock in each direction. Rather, we believe it would be
more convenient to crash investigators to have the degree information
without having to seek out the additional information about the full
lock angle from the vehicle manufacturer or other means. If an
investigator wishes to know the angle as percentage of full lock, they
can take the extra step to get the full lock angle and do the
conversion.
    We note that no change was made based upon SAE's comments. We have
considered their comments and suggested ``technical amendments.''
However, we do not believe the changes suggested by SAE could be
considered technical amendments. In addition, the submission was
received outside of the 45-day period for filing a petition for
reconsideration. As such, we will treat it as a petition for rulemaking
and will consider it under our plans for publishing an advance notice
of proposed rulemaking in the near future to explore the potential for,
and future utility of, capturing additional EDR data in light vehicles.

B. Data Clipping Flag

    We agree with Honda, the Alliance, ASC, and GAM that the data
clipping flag requirement should be delayed by one year.
    In the 2011 final rule, the agency addressed the issue of data
clipping that may occur during extreme crash events, or even for brief
periods of time during crash testing, by revising footnote 1 of Table
III to require manufacturers to report when sensors first exceed their
design range. The 2011 final rule, however, left the manner by which
the clipping is indicated up to the vehicle manufacturer and did not
limit the potential methods for achieving this requirement. Instead, we
provided the examples of a flag on the data trace, or an additional
reported field indicating the timing of the clipping.
    The Alliance, ASC, and GAM both asserted that, although they were
supportive of the data clipping flag requirement, that modifications,
including new software, will be necessary in order to meet this
requirement. The Alliance and GAM stated that an additional year is
necessary to make these modifications. ASC requested that the data
clipping requirement be delayed or eliminated until it can be properly
studied. Honda indicated that the data retrieval tool cannot simply be
reprogrammed to detect data clipping and report it. It further
explained that the restraint control systems developed to properly
operate the occupant restraint systems were not designed to capture the
time at which the sensor inputs exceed their design range. It also
stated that it is not feasible to accurately capture the saturation
timing via a data retrieval tool because of the low sampling rate of
the EDR.
    We agree with Honda, the Alliance, ASC, and GAM that modifications
may be necessary to existing EDRs in order to meet the data clipping
flag. In particular, Honda provided a reasoned explanation of the
software modifications that would be necessary to comply with the data
clipping flag requirement and why an additional year is necessary.
Although we believe that it may be feasible to use the data retrieval
tool to detect data clipping to a level of accuracy that would allow
manufacturers to report delta-V with the required accuracy, we
understand that the use of the data retrieval tool to flag the clipping
may provide some short-term technical challenges. Therefore, we are
providing one extra year of lead time for this particular requirement
to give manufacturers additional flexibility.

C. End of Event Time

    We are denying the Alliance, ASC, and Honda petitions to reconsider
amendments to the definition for an end of event. The petitioners state
that the addition of ``resultant'' to the definition may marginally
affect the determination of the end of an event. The Alliance and GAM
noted that not all EDRs capture lateral delta-V and that those vehicles
that do capture lateral delta-V may not currently calculate the
resultant. They stated that calculating the resultant delta-V could
necessitate additional software changes, delaying the ability of the
manufacturers to comply with Part 563.
    The agency agrees that not all EDRs capture lateral delta-V.
However, we note that in these cases, the resultant delta-V would
simply be the longitudinal delta-V. For all other cases, we believe
there is sufficient latitude in the definition for end of event for
vehicle manufactures to institute an EDR strategy that meets the
definition without undue burden. We note that manufacturers ultimately
determine how the crash detection algorithm resets. Therefore, in cases
where both lateral and longitudinal delta-V data are collected,
manufacturers may opt to determine when the end of the event has
occurred via the resultant cumulative delta-V, or via any method by
which they choose to reset the crash

detection algorithm. In the worst case, the vehicle will need to
capture the full 300 ms of delta-V data, which has been required by
Part 563 since the 2006 final rule.

D. Occupant Size Classification

    We are denying the Honda and Alliance petitions to reconsider the
occupant size classifications. Since the proposed rulemaking \10\ stage
of Part 563, the agency has intended for the occupant size
classification to be inclusive of the 5th percentile female as defined
in 49 CFR part 572, subpart O. The revisions enacted in the 2011 final
rule were simple clarifications to the original agency intent. We do
not believe that there is a conflict with the resolution for this data
element in Table III. Therefore, this data element will be used to
report if the occupant in a designated seating position would meet the
criteria of the 5th percentile female or larger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the 2004 Part 563 NPRM, the data element was ``Occupant
size driver occupant 5th female size y/n.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Non-Reversible Deployment of Restraints

    We are denying the Alliance and ASC petitions to clarify how the
deployment of non-reversible restraints other than air bags are
recorded. We believe that section 563.9(b) is clear that when a memory
buffer is available, EDRs must capture and record current event data
that does not involve deployment of an air bag. If the memory buffers
are full, manufacturers may either overwrite any previous data that
does not involve deployment of an air bag, or not record the current
event data if it does not involve deployment of an air bag. In this
manner, manufacturers may prioritize the capture of events that do not
involve deployments of air bags, but do deploy other non-reversible
restraints regardless of type.

F. Multi-Event Storage

    In response to the ASC request for clarification on the locking of
events involving side impact air bags, we agree that if a side impact
deployment occurs first and the EDR records lateral delta-V, this event
would need to be locked; however, a subsequent event (including the
deployment of a frontal air bag) would not need to be recorded, but it
could be allowed at the option of the manufacturer. We refer to the
preambles of the previous rulemakings on the subject. Specifically, we
stated the following in the preamble to the 2011 final rule.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 76 FR 47482.

    * * * ``In a side or side curtain/tube air bag deployment crash,
where lateral delta-V is recorded by the EDR, capture and record the
current deployment data. The memory for the air bag deployment event
must be locked to prevent any future overwriting of the data.[lrquo]
Thus, any frontal air bag deployment, or any side, or side curtain/
tube air bag deployment where lateral delta-V is recorded by the
EDR, would not require the EDR to record a second, subsequent event,
although it would allow such recording. We note that the phrase `up
to two events' remains in Sec.  563.9(b) and so there continues to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
be an obligation to record multiple non-air bag deployment events.

G. Technical Workshop

    In response to the Honda and GAM request that the agency consider
holding a technical workshop to ensure that all stakeholders are
properly prepared to comply with Part 563, we do not believe that a
technical workshop is needed at this time. We remain open to this
possibility if the need presents itself in the future.

H. Compliance Test Procedures

    The agency is working with the SAE EDR committee to ensure that any
compliance test procedure we produce would consider the SAE J1698
Vehicle Event Data Interface recommended industry practices, as
appropriate. The test procedure and accompanying documents will be
provided in the docket \12\ for the 2011 final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0106 at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' Executive
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' and the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This
rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget under those two Executive Orders. It has been determined not to
be ``nonsignificant'' under Executive Order 12866 and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rule makes
several technical changes to the regulatory text of 49 CFR part 563,
and does not increase the regulatory burden of manufacturers. A
complete statement of the costs and benefits of the introduction of
Part 563 are available in the August 2006 final rule and the
accompanying Final Regulatory Evaluation.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 71 FR 51041; Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25666-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency has discussed the relevant requirements of the Vehicle
Safety Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), Executive
Order 13045 (Protection of Children from Health and Safety Risks), the
Paperwork Reduction Act, the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and the National
Environmental Policy Act in the August 2006 final rule cited above.
Those discussions are not affected by these technical changes.

Privacy Act

    Please note that anyone is able to search the electronic form of
all documents received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the document (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 563

    Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Regulatory Text

    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 563 is amended as
follows:

PART 563--EVENT DATA RECORDERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 563 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30101, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30166,
30168; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

0
2. In Sec.  563.8, revise Table III in paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  563.8  Data format.

    (a) * * *

                                     Table III--Reported Data Element Format
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Data element                    Minimum range             Accuracy \1\              Resolution
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lateral acceleration................  At option of              At option of             At option of
                                       manufacturer.             manufacturer.            manufacturer.
Longitudinal acceleration...........  At option of              At option of             At option of
                                       manufacturer.             manufacturer.            manufacturer.
Normal Acceleration.................  At option of              At option of             At option of
                                       manufacturer.             manufacturer.            manufacturer.
Longitudinal delta-V................  -100 km/h to +100 km/h..   10%.......  1 km/h.
Lateral delta-V.....................  -100 km/h to +100 km/h..   10%.......  1 km/h.
Maximum delta-V, longitudinal.......  -100 km/h to +100 km/h..   10%.......  1 km/h.
Maximum delta-V, lateral............  -100 km/h to +100 km/h..   10%.......  1 km/h.
Time, maximum delta-V, longitudinal.  0-300 ms, or 0-End of      3 ms......  2.5 ms.
                                       Event Time plus 30 ms,
                                       whichever is shorter.
Time, maximum delta-V, lateral......  0-300 ms, or 0-End of      3 ms......  2.5 ms.
                                       Event Time plus 30 ms,
                                       whichever is shorter.
Time, maximum delta-V, resultant....  0-300 ms, or 0-End of      3 ms......  2.5 ms.
                                       Event Time plus 30 ms,
                                       whichever is shorter.
Vehicle Roll Angle..................  -1080 deg to +1080 deg..   10%.......  10 deg.
Speed, vehicle indicated............  0 km/h to 200 km/h......   1 km/h....  1 km/h.
Engine throttle, percent full         0 to 100%...............   5%........  1%.
 (accelerator pedal percent full).
Engine rpm..........................  0 to 10,000 rpm.........   100 rpm...  100 rpm.
Service brake.......................  On or Off...............  N/A....................  On or Off.
ABS activity........................  On or Off...............  N/A....................  On or Off.
Stability control...................  On, Off, or Engaged.....  N/A....................  On, Off, or Engaged.
Steering input......................  -250 deg CW to + 250 deg   5%........   1%.
                                       CCW.
Ignition cycle, crash...............  0 to 60,000.............   1 cycle...  1 cycle.
Ignition cycle, download............  0 to 60,000.............   1 cycle...  1 cycle.
Safety belt status, driver..........  On or Off...............  N/A....................  On or Off.
Safety belt status, right front       On or Off...............  N/A....................  On or Off.
 passenger.
Frontal air bag warning lamp........  On or Off...............  N/A....................  On or Off.
Frontal air bag suppression switch    On, Off, or Auto........  N/A....................  On, Off, or Auto.
 status, right front passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   0 to 250 ms.............  ms.........  1 ms.
 deploy/first stage, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 deploy/first stage, right front
 passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 nth stage, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, time to   0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 nth stage, right front passenger.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth       Yes or No...............  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 stage disposal, driver.
Frontal air bag deployment, nth       Yes or No...............  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 stage disposal, right front
 passenger.
Side air bag deployment, time to      0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 deploy, driver.
Side air bag deployment, time to      0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 deploy, right front passenger.
Side curtain/tube air bag             0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 deployment, time to deploy, driver
 side.
Side curtain/tube air bag             0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 deployment, time to deploy, right
 side.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 fire, driver.
Pretensioner deployment, time to      0 to 250 ms.............   2 ms......  1 ms.
 fire, right front passenger.
Seat track position switch,           Yes or No...............  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 foremost, status, driver.
Seat track position switch,           Yes or No...............  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 foremost, status, right front
 passenger.
Occupant size classification, driver  5th percentile female or  N/A....................  Yes or No.
                                       larger.
Occupant size classification, right   Child...................  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 front passenger.
Occupant position classification,     Out of position.........  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 driver.
Occupant position classification,     Out of position.........  N/A....................  Yes or No.
 right front passenger.
Multi-event, number of event........  1 or 2..................  N/A....................  1 or 2.
Time from event 1 to 2..............  0 to 5.0 sec............  0.1 sec................  0.1 sec.
Complete file recorded..............  Yes or No...............  N/A....................  Yes or No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Accuracy requirement only applies within the range of the physical sensor. For vehicles manufactured after
  September 1, 2014, if measurements captured by a sensor exceed the design range of the sensor, the reported
  element must indicate when the measurement first exceeded the design range of the sensor.

* * * * *

    Issued on: July 19, 2012.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-19580 Filed 8-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: June 1, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 103)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 26087]
[DOCID:fr01jn09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0218]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Knights
Landing, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Knights Landing Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 90.1, at
Knights Landing, CA. The deviation is necessary to allow the bridge
owner, California Department of Transportation, to perform maintenance
and replace the paint coating system for the drawbridge. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain in the closed-to-navigation position during
the deviation period.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. on June 1, 2009 to 7
a.m. on November 26, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0346 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0218
in the Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in
the Docket ID column. This material is also available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 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 rule,
call or e-mail David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge Section, Eleventh Coast
Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: California Department of Transportation
requested a temporary change to the operation of the Knights Landing
Drawbridge, mile 90.1, Sacramento River, at Knights Landing, CA. The
drawbridge opens on signal if at least 12 hours' notice is given as
required by 33 CFR 117.189(b). The deviation period would allow the
drawspan to remain in the closed-to-navigation position from 7 a.m. on
June 1, 2009 to 7 a.m. on November 26, 2009, to perform maintenance and
replace the paint coating system on the drawbridge.
    The Knights Landing Drawbridge navigation span provides a minimum
vertical clearance of 3 feet above the 100-year floodplain. During the
deviation period, the vertical clearance will be reduced by no more
than 5 feet, due to an under-deck work platform and sealed containment
the length of the bridge. Navigation on the waterway consists mainly of
recreational vessels. During the past 7 years, in addition to the
annual bridge openings for maintenance, the bridge drawspan was open
one time for a sailboat.
    No alternative routes are available. The bridge drawspan can open
for an emergency if 72 hours' advance notice is given to the bridge
owner. This temporary deviation has been coordinated with all affected
waterway users. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation were
raised.
    Vessels that can transit the bridge, while in the closed-to-
navigation position, may continue to do so at any time.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: May 14, 2009.
P.F. Zukunft,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-12599 Filed 5-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 198 (Friday, October 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 54899]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22328]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Regional Docket No. II-2019-4; FRL-10001-06-Region 2]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition on State
Operating Permit for Newark Bay Cogeneration Partnership LP

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Final Order on Petition on Clean Air Act Title V
Operating Permit.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator signed
an Order dated August 16, 2019, responding to a petition related to a
Clean Air Act (CAA) title V operating permit issued by the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to Newark Bay
Cogeneration Partnership LP for the Newark Bay Cogeneration facility
located in Essex County, New Jersey, Operating Permit No. BOP160001, PI
No. 07617.

ADDRESSES: The EPA requests that you contact the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view copies of the final
Order, the Petition, and other supporting information. You may review
copies of the final Order, the Petition, and other supporting
information at the EPA Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New
York, New York 10007-1866. You may view the hard copies Monday through
Friday, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., excluding federal holidays. If you
wish to examine these documents, you should make an appointment at
least 24 hours before the visiting day. Additionally, the final Order
and Petition are available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/title-v-petition-database.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suilin Chan, EPA Region 2, 212-637-
4019<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 505(b)(1) of the CAA affords the EPA
a 45-day period to review and object to, as appropriate, operating
permits proposed by state permitting authorities under title V of the
CAA. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any person to petition the
EPA Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60
days after the expiration of the EPA's 45-day review period if the EPA
has not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on
objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity
during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the
petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues
during the comment period or unless the grounds for the issues arose
after this period.
    The EPA received a petition from the Ironbound Community
Corporation dated March 18, 2019 relating to the Permit. The petition
was submitted under CAA Sec.  505(b)(2) asking EPA to object to the
Permit.
    On August 16, 2019, the EPA Administrator issued an Order denying
the Petition. The Order explains the basis for the EPA's decision.
    Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that a petitioner
may request judicial review of those portions of an order that deny
issues in a title V petition. Any petition for review shall be filed in
the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit no later
than December 10, 2019.

    Dated: September 23, 2019.
Peter Lopez,
 Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2019-22328 Filed 10-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 196 (Thursday, October 8, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63544-63545]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22327]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC21-2-000.
    Applicants: Milligan 1 Wind LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Milligan 1 Wind LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20201001-5219.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG21-1-000.
    Applicants: Muscle Shoals Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Muscle Shoals Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20201001-5242.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2201-002.
    Applicants: GridLiance High Plains LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Gridliance HP Revised Winfield
Joint Ownership Agreement to be effective 9/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20201001-5180.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2726-001.
    Applicants: Grand Energy, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to MBR Application Filing
to be effective 9/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-3047-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PNM EIM OATT Tariff Changes
Attachment S to be effective 4/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 9/30/20.
    Accession Number: 20200930-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/21/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-10-000
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Interim Black
Start Agreement (RS 234) 2020 to be effective 11/30/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20201001-5246.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-11-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment PASNY Tariff 10-1-
2020 to be effective 10/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/1/20.
    Accession Number: 20201001-5276.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-12-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Notice of Succession
(Eversource) to be effective 10/2/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-13-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (National
Grid) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5056.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-14-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (Unitil) to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5057.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-15-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (HQUS
Eversource) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-16-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: 2020-10-02_PSCo-NXER-Neptune-E&P-
0.1.0-NOC to be effective 10/3/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5067.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-17-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (HQUS National
Grid) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-18-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (HQUS Unitil)
to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-19-000.
    Applicants: NECEC Transmission LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Notice of Succession (HQUS
Additional) to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5079.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-20-000.
    Applicants: Central Maine Power Company.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-21-000.
    Applicants: Harts Mill Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Reactive Power Compensation
Filing to be effective 12/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-22-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: BPA--NITSA (WEID) to be
effective 10/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-23-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Service Agreement
No. 612 to be effective 9/28/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5132.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-24-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule FERC No. 315
between Tri-State and SLVREC to be effective 11/5/2020.
    Filed Date: 10/2/20.
    Accession Number: 20201002-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/20.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings

must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but
intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 2, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-22327 Filed 10-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9610-9611]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03695]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-9395-000]

Killamsetty, Pradeep; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on February 11, 2022, Pradeep Killamsetty
submitted for filing, application for authority to hold interlocking
positions, pursuant to

section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 825d (b) and Part
45.8 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules
of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR part 45.8.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 the 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 the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically may mail
similar pleadings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in
docketed proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 4, 2022.

    Dated: February 15, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03695 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 MEMORANDUM TO: Record FROM: Meghan Kandle, ERG DATE: 18 August 2004 SUBJECT: Analysis of Industry Supplied Data for OCPSF Focus Group 3 In May 2004, EPA requested process information and wastewater dioxin and flow data from eight companies that operate 20 facilities in Focus Group 3. This memorandum describes the data provided by industry and the methodology used to calculate toxicity weighted concentrations and loads. The following attachments are included at the end of this memorandum:

° Attachment A: Spreadsheet presenting the wastewater dioxin and flow data that facilities provided.

° Attachment B: Spreadsheet calculating toxicity weighted concentrations.

° Attachment C: Spreadsheet calculating loads in grams TEQ.

° Attachment D: Spreadsheet calculating loads in toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE).

EPA received responses from eight companies ( 19 facilities) with wastewater analytical data for congeners from the following types of wastewater:

° Chlorine gas condensates; ° Oxychlorination quench water; ° Treated effluent from chlor alkali and other organic processes; ° Treated effluent from vinyl and other organic processes; ° Combined effluent from vinyl, chlor alkali, and other organic processes; and ° Treated effluent from PVC and other organic processes.

Data submittals were unique for each facility. Depending on the size and layout of each facility, plants may produce more than one stream for each of the above wastewater categories. For example, one facility may have two separate wastestreams from chlor alkali manufacturing. Also, some facilities provided data from a single sampling episode, while others provided multiple 2 years of data. Facilities also provided the corresponding wastewater flow for some, but not all, sets of concentration data. Attachment A presents the facility data as data entered by ERG.

ERG conducted two analyses using the provided data. One analysis examines the toxicityweighted concentrations of dioxin in wastewater by wastewater type. The other evaluates toxicweighted discharges by facility type ( i. e. stand alone versus integrated facilities). The following sections describe each analysis in more detail.

Toxicity Weighted Dioxin Concentrations Using the toxic equivalency factors ( TEF) in Table 1, ERG estimated toxicity weighted concentrations for each wastewater stream. The toxic equivalency of the dioxin mixture is calculated by multiplying each congener's concentration by the corresponding TEF, then summing the products for all 17 congeners. For more information on TEFs, see Section 4 of the TSD.

Table 1. Toxic Equivalency Factors for 17 Dioxin Congeners Congener TEF 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo p dioxin 1 1,2,3,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.5 1,2,3,4,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.1 1,2,3,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.1 1,2,3,7,8,9 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.1 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 Heptachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.01 Octachlorodibenzo p dioxin 0.001 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 0.1 1,2,3,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzofuran 0.05 2,3,4,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzofuran 0.5 1,2,3,4,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1 1,2,3,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1 2,3,4,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1 1,2,3,7,8,9 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 0.1 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 Heptachlorodibenzofuran 0.01 1,2,3,4,7,8,9 Heptachlorodibenzofuran 0.01 Octachlorodibenzofuran 0.001 3 When facilities provided multiple sets of concentration data for a single outfall or stream, ERG calculated an average concentration for the stream. ERG then grouped wastewater streams by wastewater category ( e. g. chlorine condensates, oxychlorination quench, etc...) and calculated an average concentration for each facility. ERG used this same methodology to calculate average wastewater flows. Table 2 presents the average concentration and wastewater flow for each facility. To protect confidential business information, ERG excluded data for five facilities from Table 2. Attachment B of this memorandum shows the calculation of toxicity weighted concentrations. 4 Table 2. Average Dioxin Concentrations and Wastewater Flows Facility Chlorine Condensates EDC Quench Treated Chlor alkali effluent Treated Vinyl Effluent Treated Vinyl and chlor alkali effluent Treated PVC Effluent Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Conc. pgTEQ/ L Flow MGD Dow, Freeport, TX CBI CBI CBI CBI Dow, Plaquemine, LA CBI CBI CBI CBI Georgia Gulf, Plaquemine,

LA CBI Georgia Gulf, Lake Charles, LA CBI Formosa Plastics, Point Comfort, TX 0.033 0.000104 Formosa Plastics, LA 0.050 PPG Lake Charles, LA 35,674 0.19 62.7 1.49 110 11.6 PPG, Natrium, WV 238 16.5 14.8 Oxyvinyls LaPorte, TX 1,735 0.217 0.194 0.508 1.62 3.12 0.77 Occidental, Convent, LA 2,193 0.09 Oxyvinyls, Deer Park, TX 10,480 0.14 0 535 17.2 0.333 Occidental, Ingleside, TX 0 5.61 1.4 Occidental, Mobile, AL 17,857 0.008 Occidental, Muscle Shoals, AL 3,269 0.015 Occidental, Taft, LA 281 2.8 Vulcan Chemical,

Geismar, LA CBI Toxic Discharges by Facility Type 5 Nine facilities provided dioxin concentration data with corresponding flow rates for treated wastewater from vinyl and/ or chlor alkali processes. ERG used these data to calculate loads in grams TEQ and toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE). For the TEQ calculation, ERG multiplied the toxicity weighted concentrations ( g TEQ/ L) from the preceding section by the corresponding wastewater flow. ERG estimated TWPE by multiplying each congener's load by the corresponding toxic weighting factor ( TWF), and summing the TWPE for the dioxin mixture. Table 3 presents the congener TWF values.

Table 3. Toxic Weighting Factors for 17 Dioxin Congeners Congener TWF 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo p dioxin 421,600,000 1,2,3,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzo p dioxin 215,384,615 1,2,3,4,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 43,076,923 1,2,3,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 41,791,045 1,2,3,7,8,9 Hexachlorodibenzo p dioxin 43,076,923 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 Heptachlorodibenzo p dioxin 4,179,104 Octachlorodibenzo p dioxin 423,510 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzofuran 6,696,140 1,2,3,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzofuran 3,294,118 2,3,4,7,8 Pentachlorodibenzofuran 32,941,176 1,2,3,4,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 6,658,740 1,2,3,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 6,666,667 2,3,4,6,7,8 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 6,666,667 1,2,3,7,8,9 Hexachlorodibenzofuran 6,658,740 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 Heptachlorodibenzofuran 665,874 1,2,3,4,7,8,9 Heptachlorodibenzofuran 666,667 Octachlorodibenzofuran 67,367 For this analysis, discharges were grouped by the following facility categories to allow for comparison to TRI and CCC discharge data:

° Stand alone chlorine manufacturers using the chlor alkali process; 6 ° Stand alone vinyl manufacturers; ° Integrated chlor alkali and vinyl facilities; and ° Stand alone PVC manufacturers.

When facilities provided multiple sets of concentration data for a single outfall, ERG calculated an average load for each reporting year, then averaged across the years for each stream. ERG calculated a total facility load by summing the average annual loads for each outfall. Table 4 presents the total annual loads in grams TEQ and TWPE for the nine facilities that provided flow and concentration data. To protect confidential business information, ERG excluded data for three facilities from Table 4. Attachment C of this memorandum shows the calculation of toxicity weighted loads in grams TEQ, and Attachment D shows the calculation of TWPE.

Table 4. Estimated Total Annual Facility Loads Facility Stand Alone Chlor Alkali Integrated Chlor alkali and Vinyl g TEQ TWPE g TEQ TWPE Dow, Freeport, TX CBI CBI Dow, Plaquemine, LA CBI CBI PPG, Lake Charles, LA 1.83 270,682 PPG, Natrium, WV 0.677 126,089 Georgia Gulf, Plaquemine, LA CBI CBI Oxyvinyls, Deer Park, TX 0.41 78,873 Oxyvinyls, LaPorte, TX 0.0039 935 Occidental, Ingleside, TX 0.011 2,534 Occidental, Taft, LA 1.085 158,853 Total 1.76 284,942 10.13 2,079,831


14165 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations Intake Structures for New Facilities; Direct Final Rule.'' We published the direct final rule on December 26, 2002 ( 67 FR 78948), to make three minor technical corrections to the final regulations implementing section 316( b) of the Clean Water Act for new facilities. We stated in the direct final rule that if we received adverse comment by January 27, 2003, we would publish a timely notice of withdrawal in the Federal Register. We subsequently received adverse comment on the direct final rule. We will address those comments in a subsequent final action based on the parallel proposal also published on December 26, 2002 ( 67 FR 78956). As stated in the parallel proposal, we will not institute a second comment period on this action. DATES: As of March 24, 2003, EPA withdraws the direct final rule published at 67 FR 78948, on December 26, 2002. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha Segall, Engineering and Analysis Division ( 4303T), USEPA Office of Science and Technology, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460 ( phone: 202   566   1041; email: segall. martha@ epa. gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published a direct final rule on December 26, 2002, to make minor changes to a final rule published December 18, 2001, implementing section 316( b) of the Clean Water Act ( CWA). The December 2001 final rule established national technology based performance requirements applicable to the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures at new facilities using water withdrawn from rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, oceans or other waters of the United States for cooling. The national requirements established the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact associated with the use of these structures. The direct final rule clarified three technical issues on velocity monitoring, authority to require additional design and construction technologies, and procedures governing requests for less stringent alternative requirements. EPA published a companion proposed rule on the same day as the direct final rule. The proposed rule invited comment on the substance of the direct final rule. The proposed rule stated that if EPA received adverse comment by January 27, 2003, the direct final rule would not take effect and EPA would publish a notice in the Federal Register withdrawing the direct final rule before the March 26, 2003, effective date. The EPA subsequently received adverse comment on the direct final rule. EPA plans to address those comments in a subsequent action. Today's action withdraws the direct final rule; the amendments to the final regulations addressing cooling water intake structures for new facilities will not take effect on March 26, 2003.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 125 Environmental protection, Cooling water intake structures, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control.

Dated: March 19, 2003. Christine Todd Whitman, Administrator. [ FR Doc. 03   7047 Filed 3   21   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [ OPP   2002   0278; FRL   7299   4]

Pesticides; Tolerance Exemptions for Active and Inert Ingredients for Use in Antimicrobial Formulations ( Food Contact Surface Sanitizing Solutions); Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: EPA received adverse comment on the direct final rule `` Pesticides; Tolerance Exemptions for Active and Inert Ingredients for Use in Antimicrobial Formulations ( Food Contact Surface Sanitizing Solutions),'' published in the Federal Register of December 3, 2002, because of the adverse comment EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule. The direct final rule was intended to add a new section to part 180 listing the pesticide chemicals that are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance when used in food contact surface sanitizing solutions. DATES: The withdrawal is effective March 24, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 305   6304; fax number: ( 703) 305   0599; e mail address: boyle. kathryn@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a food manufacturer, or antimicrobial pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected categories and entities may include, but are not limited to:   Industry ( NAICS 311), e. g., Food manufacturing.   Producers ( NAICS 32561), e. g., Antimicrobial pesticides. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

II. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

A. Docket EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0278. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805.

B. Electronic Access You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 15: 11 Mar 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24MRR1. SGM 24MRR1 14166 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 56 / Monday, March 24, 2003 / Rules and Regulations of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit II. A. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

III. What Action is the Agency Taking?

EPA has received adverse comment on the direct final rule published in the Federal Register of December 3, 2002 ( 67 FR 71847) ( FRL   6824   2). EPA stated in that direct final rule that if EPA received adverse comment by February 3, 2003, the direct final rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. The direct final rule being withdrawn contains a list of exempt chemicals duplicated from the Food and Drug Administration's ( FDA) regulations in 21 CFR 178.1010. The Agency will continue to pursue this rulemaking effort by publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking in a future edition of the Federal Register. The comments on the direct final rule will be addressed in that future notice of proposed rulemaking.

IV. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 17, 2003.

Debra Edwards,

Acting Director, Registration Division.

[ FR Doc. 03   6946 Filed 3   21   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [ DA 03   744, MM Docket No. 01   44, RM   10022]

Digital Television Broadcast Service; Derby, KS AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Pappas Telecasting of America, allots DTV channel 46 to Derby, Kansas. See 66 FR 12753, February 28, 2001. DTV channel 46 can be allotted to Derby, Kansas, in compliance with the principle community coverage requirements of Section 73.625( a) at reference coordinates 37   54   12 N. and 97   37   06 W. with a power of 1000, HAAT of 246 meters. With this action, this proceeding is terminated. DATES: Effective May 5, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Media Bureau, ( 202) 418   1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MM Docket No. 01   44, adopted March 11, 2003, and released March 20, 2003. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY   A257, Washington, DC. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., CY   B402, Washington, DC, 20554, telephone ( 202) 863   2893, facsimile ( 202) 863   2898, or via e mail qualexint@ aol. com.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Digital television broadcasting, Television.

Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 73   [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U. S. C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

§ 73.622 [ Amended]

2. Section 73.622( b), the Table of Digital Television Allotments under Kansas, is amended by adding Derby, DTV channel 46. Federal Communications Commission. Barbara A. Kreisman, Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau. [ FR Doc. 03   6876 Filed 3   21   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712   01   P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [ DA 03   745, MB Docket No. 02   282, RM   10523]

Digital Television Broadcast Service; Minot, ND AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the request of Prairie Public Broadcasting, substitutes DTV channel * 40 for DTV channel * 57 at Minot, North Dakota. See 17 FCC Rcd 18093 ( 2002). DTV channel * 40 can be allotted to Minot, North Dakota, in compliance with the principle community coverage requirements of Section 73.625( a) at reference coordinates 48   03   02 N. and 101   23   25 W. with a power of 1000, HAAT of 253 meters and with a DTV service population of 85 thousand. Since the community of Minot is located within 400 kilometers of the U. S. Canadian border, concurrence from the Canadian government has been obtained for this allotment. With this action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective May 5, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Media Bureau, ( 202) 418   1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 02   282, adopted March 11, 2003, and released March 20, 2003. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY   A257, Washington, DC. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., CY   B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone ( 202) 863   2893, facsimile ( 202) 863   2898, or via e mail qualexint@ aol. com.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Digital television broadcasting, Television.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 15: 11 Mar 21, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 24MRR1. SGM 24MRR1