[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 23, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64748-64755]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25968]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005; FRL-9743-1]

National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Torch Lake Superfund
Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 is
publishing a Direct Final Notice of Deletion of the Isle Royale
Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailing parcels of Operable Unit 3 (OU3),
and the Mason Sands Tailings parcel of Operable Unit 1 (OU1) of the
Torch Lake Superfund Site (Site), located in Houghton County, Michigan
from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant
to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final partial deletion is being
published by EPA, with the concurrence of the State of Michigan through
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), because EPA
has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA at
these identified parcels have been completed. However, this partial
deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.
    This partial deletion pertains to the surface tailings, drums, and
slag piles of Isle Royale Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailings
parcels of OU3 and the Mason Sands Tailings parcel of OU1. The
following land parcels will remain on the NPL and are not being
considered for deletion as part of this action: Dollar Bay, Point
Mills, Calumet Lake Tailing, Boston Pond Tailing, North Entry and
Quincy Smelter.

DATES: This direct final partial deletion is effective December 24,
2012 unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 23, 2012. If
adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final partial deletion in the Federal Register informing the
public that the deletion will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1986-0005, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
     Email: Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial Project Manager, at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Email: Dave Novak, Community Involvement Coordinator, at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion Process Manager, at (312)
886-2077.

     Mail: Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial Project Manager, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (SR-6J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Dave Novak, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SI-7J), 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-621-8431.
     Hand deliver: Dave Novak, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SI-7J), 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. 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-SFUND-
1986-0005. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://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 email comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email 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 docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:

Regional Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL, 60604, Hours: Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Lake Linden/Hubbell Public Library, 601 Calumet Street, Lake Linden, MI
49945,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Hours: Monday through Friday 8:00am to 4:00
p.m., Tuesday and Thursday 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Portage Lake District Library, 105 Huron, Houghton, MI 49931, (906)
482-4570, Hours: Monday, Tuesday and Thursday 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.,
Wednesday and Friday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and Saturday 12:00 p.m.
to 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (SR-6J), 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 5 is publishing this Direct Final Notice of Deletion of
the Isle Royale Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailings parcels of OU3,
and Mason Sands Tailings parcel of OU1 of the Torch Lake Superfund
(Site) from the NPL and requests public comments on this action. The
NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which
EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980,
as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to
present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or the
environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions
financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). This partial
deletion of the Torch Lake Superfund Site is proposed in accordance
with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with the Notice of Policy
Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed on the National Priorities
List (60 FR 55466) on November 1, 1995. As described in 300.425(e)(3)
of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for Fund-
financed remedial actions if future conditions warrant such actions.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective December 24, 2012 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by November 23, 2012. Along with this Direct
Final Notice of Partial Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of
Intent for Partial Deletion in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the
Federal Register. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period on this partial deletion action, EPA will publish
a timely withdrawal of this direct final Notice for Partial Deletion
before the effective date of the partial deletion, and the deletion may
not take effect. Alternatively EPA may, as appropriate, prepare a
response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the
basis of the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion and the comments
already received. In this case, there will be no additional opportunity
to comment on the agency's response.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Isle Royale Tailings and
Michigan Smelter Tailings parcels of OU3 and the Mason Sands Tailings
parcel of OU1 of the Torch Lake Superfund Site and demonstrates how the
deletion criteria are met at these land parcels. Section V discusses
EPA's action to partially delete the Site parcels from the NPL unless
adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
    iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.

    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Isle Royale
Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailings parcels of OU3, and the Mason
Sands Tailings parcel of OU1 of the Torch Lake Superfund Site:
    (1) EPA consulted with the State of Michigan prior to developing
this direct final Notice of Partial Deletion and the Notice of Intent
for Partial Deletion co-published today in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of the Federal Register.
    (2) EPA has provided the State 30 working days for review of this
Direct Final Notice of Partial Deletion and the parallel Notice of
Intent for Partial Deletion prior to their publication today, and the
State, through MDEQ, has concurred on the partial deletion of the Site
from the NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final Notice
of Partial Deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel
Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion is being published in the Daily
Mining Gazette Newspaper, located in Houghton, Michigan. The newspaper
notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice
of Intent for Partial Deletion of the Site from the NPL. A public
meeting will be held prior to the end of the comment period to ensure
the public understands the delisting process and the locations of the
land parcels proposed for deletion.
    (4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed partial
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this partial deletion action, EPA will publish a
timely notice of withdrawal of this Direct Final Notice of Partial
Deletion before its effective date and will prepare a response to
comments. EPA may continue with the deletion process on the basis of
the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion and the comments already
received.
    Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter
EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is
designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA
management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion
of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future
response actions, should future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Isle Royale Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailings parcels of OU3 and
Mason Sands Tailings parcel of OU1 of the Torch Lake Superfund Site
from the NPL. The Isle Royale Tailings area comprises approximately 64
acres of cover material northwest of U.S. 41, next to Portage Lake. It
is located near the town of Houghton, in the northwestern corner of
Section 5 in Portage Township, Michigan (Township 54 N Range 33 W). The
Torch Lake Superfund Site Isle Royale Tailings property parcel is also
referred to as Isle Royale Stamp Mill or Isle Royale Sands. It is the
parcel of property on the west side of Houghton that was part of a mine
rock crushing operation. The Site has no relation to the Isle Royale
that is the island located in Lake Superior.
    A legal description of the Isle Royale Tailings portion of the
Torch Lake Superfund Site is as follows: A parcel of land in Government
Lot 2, Section 5, T54N, R33W, City of Houghton, Houghton County,
Michigan. Commencing at the West \1/4\ corner of said Section 5; thence
North 1069.47 feet; thence East 1584.79 feet to the point of beginning
on the Northeasterly right-of-way of the Soo Line Railroad; thence N
33[deg] 42' 20'' E 229.36 feet to the South right-of-way (66-ft. R/W)
of Carlos Street of the recorded plat of Royale Isle Subdivision;
thence S 56[deg] 17'40'' E 380.00 feet along said Carlos Street right-
of-way and extension thereof; thence S 33[deg] 42' 20'' W 250.29 feet
to the Northeasterly right-of-way of said Soo railroad; thence along
said right-of-way on a curve to the right N 53[deg] 08' 19'' W 380.68
feet more or less to the point of beginning.
    The Michigan Smelter Tailings parcel is located in a 15-acre, low-
lying area of stamp sands east of Houghton Canal Road on the shores of
Portage Lake, in Sections 28, 33, and 34 of Adams/Stanton Township,
Michigan (55 N Range 34 W). There is a piece of property nearby, on the
west side of Houghton Canal Road, known as Michigan Smelter that
includes the buildings and abandoned materials where industrial
activities took place. This property is not part of the Torch Lake
Superfund Site and was not investigated or remediated as part of the
Site activities. There may be high levels of arsenic or other
contaminants associated with past mining activity in that area, but
such contamination would not be considered as part of the Torch Lake
Superfund Site.
    The legal description of the Michigan Smelter Tailings portion of
the Torch Lake Superfund Site is as follows--Parcel 1: Section 33,
T55N, R34W, Adams Township, Houghton County, Michigan, Government Lot 1
lying North of County Road 554, except commencing at the North \1/4\
corner; thence South 320 feet to P.O.B.; thence Southeasterly 90.18
feet; thence Northeasterly 569.59 feet; thence North 202.57 feet;
thence Southeasterly 410.48 feet to South right of way of Canal Road;
thence Southeasterly along Canal Road 888 feet more or less; thence
South 676 feet to South line of Government Lot 1; thence Southwesterly
1692 feet to the West line of Government Lot 1; thence North 980.78
feet to P.O.B. Parcel 2: Section 34, T55N, R34W, Adams Township,
Houghton County, Michigan, Government Lot 3 lying North of County Road
554, also West 121.90 feet of Government Lot 4 lying North of County
Road 554. Parcel 3: Section 28, T55N, R34W, Stanton Township, Houghton
County, Michigan, part of Government Lot 4, commencing North 00[deg]
34' 31'' West 35.08 feet from South \1\2\; Corner; thence North 00[deg]
34' 31'' West 1252.70 feet; thence south 89[deg] 33' 12'' East 102.60
feet; thence South 89[deg] 35' 56'' East 151.39 feet to shore; thence
South 46[deg] 13' 52'' East 804.26 feet; thence South 55[deg] 13' 38''
East 1279.14 ; thence West 713.78 feet; thence North 46[deg] 48' 32''
West 766.52 feet; thence South 43[deg] 09' 07'' West 66 feet; thence
South 01[deg] 45' 30'' East 57.69 feet; thence South 08[deg] 31' 32''
West 141.99 feet; thence South 10[deg] 03' 39'' West 69.72 feet; thence
South 71[deg] 33' 12'' West 552.04 feet to P.O.B.
    The Mason Sands Tailings area is about 225 acres and is located
within a fenced in area south of M-26 and expands until the land meets
the lake (Torch Lake). It is adjacent to the Village of Mason and is
located in Sections 23, 26, and 27 of Township 55 North, Range

33 West. Located within the Mason Sands parcel of the Site are
dilapidated industrial structures, building foundations, and other
debris. These abandoned structures, foundations and debris are not part
of the Torch Lake Superfund Site and were not investigated or
remediated. The surface tailings at this Mason area constitute the area
addressed by the Torch Lake Site remedial action. The legal description
of the Mason Sands portion of the Torch Lake Superfund Site is as
follows. Government. Lot 2--Section 14--T.55N-R.33 W lying East of
State Highway M-26 Right-of-Way, except as follows: Commencing at a
point on shore of Torch Lake 500' from meander post on line between
Sections 13 & 14, thence N.55[deg]40' West to North boundary line of
Lot 2 Section 14, thence East along North boundary of said Lot 2 to
shore of Torch Lake, thence Southwesterly along said lake to Point of
Beginning except Right-of-Way of C&H RR. 53.32.A. Gov't. Lots 1, 2, 3,
and 4--Section 23--T.55 N.-R.33 W. lying East of abandoned railroad
Right-of-Way, except as follows: Part of Government Lot 4, Section 23,
and Government Lot 5, Section 26, T.55N, R.33W, Osceola Township,
Houghton County, Michigan, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a section corner common to Sections 22, 23, 26 and 27,
T.55N, R.33W; then due South 480.66 feet to the point of beginning:
thence N43[deg] 54' 04'' E 1164.53 feet; thence S51[deg] 08' 38''E
124.89 feet to a point located in the Northwesterly right-of-way line
of State Highway M-26; thence S00[deg] 02' 18'' W 112.29 feet to a
point located in the Southeasterly right-of-way line of State Highway
M-26; thence S50[deg] 16' 58'' E 21.89 feet; thence S35[deg] 39' 41'' E
251.20 feet; thence S32[deg] 31' 34'' W 189.24 feet; thence N55[deg]
59' 01'' W 158.27 feet; thence N58[deg] 48' 17'' W 75.02 feet to a
point located in the Northwesterly right-of-way line of an abandoned
railroad; thence S32[deg] 31' 34'' W 44.66 feet along said
Northwesterly right-of-way line of an abandoned railroad; thence on a
curve to the right, having a radius of 2814.93 feet a long chord
bearing and distance of S39[deg] 15' 17'' W 659.63 feet, 661.15 feet
along said Northwesterly right-of-way line of an abandoned railroad;
thence continuing along said abandoned railroad right-of-way S45[deg]
59' 00'' W 458.12 feet; thence due North 468.57 feet to the point of
beginning, containing 461,453 square feet, which is 10.59 acres
including road right-of-ways. Government. Lot 5--Section 26--T.55N-
R.33W. lying East of abandoned railroad Right-of-Way, except as
follows: Part of Government Lot 4, Section 23, and Government Lot 5,
Section 26, T.55N, R.33W., Osceola Township, Houghton County, Michigan,
more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a section corner
common to Sections 22, 23, 26, and 27, T.55N, R.33W.; then due South
480.66 feet to the point of beginning: thence N43[deg] 54' 04'' E
1164.53 feet; thence S51[deg] 08' 38'' E 124.89 feet to a point located
in the Northwesterly right-of-way line of State Highway M-26; thence
S00[deg] 02' 18'' W 112.29 feet to a point located in the Southeasterly
right-of-way line of State Highway M-26; thence S50[deg] 16' 58'' E
21.89 feet; thence S35[deg] 39' 41'' E 251.20 feet; thence S32[deg] 31'
34'' W 189.24 feet; thence N55[deg] 59' 01'' W 158.27 feet; thence
N58[deg] 48' 17'' W 75.02 feet to a point located in the Northwesterly
right-of-way line of an abandoned railroad; thence S32[deg] 31' 34'' W
44.66 feet along said Northwesterly right-of-way line of an abandoned
railroad; thence on a curve to the right, having a radius of 2814.93
feet a long chord bearing and distance of S39[deg] 15' 17'' W 659.63
feet, 661.15 feet along said Northwesterly right-of-way line of an
abandoned railroad; thence continuing along said abandoned railroad
right-of-way S45[deg] 59' 00'' W 458.12 feet; thence due North 468.57
feet to the point of beginning, containing 461,453 square feet, which
is 10.59 acres including road right-of-ways. Government Lot 1--Section
27--T.55N-R.33W lying east of abandoned railroad Right-of-Way. That
portion of Government Lot 2--Section 27--T.55N-R.33W lying in the West
\1/2\ of the Southwest \1/4\ of said Section. It being understood and
intended that the above described land extends to the waters edge of
Torch Lake and to include any tailing sands and slag that may have
accreted to said land, or to other lands in Section 26--T.55N.--R.33W.

Site Background and History

Site Location

    The Site is located on the Keweenaw Peninsula in Houghton County,
Michigan. The Site (CERCLIS ID MID980901946) includes Torch Lake, the
northern portion of Portage Lake, and the northern entry of Torch Lake.
The following areas were selected for remedial measures and thus became
part of the Site: defined areas of stamp sands, tailing piles, and slag
materials along the shore of and in the vicinity of Torch Lake,
Northern Portage Lake, Keweenaw Waterway, Lake Superior, Boston Pond,
Calumet Lake, Lake Linden, Hubbell/Tamarack City, Mason, Calumet Lake,
Michigan Smelter, Isle Royale, Gross Point, and Quincy Smelter. These
defined areas were not investigated at depth and were defined as part
of the Torch Lake Superfund Site the surficial materials (stamp sands,
tailings, and slag) on these areas and their relative locations to the
Torch Lake water body. These areas cover over 600 acres. During the
Site investigation, samples were taken of the surface (0-6 inches) and
shallow subsurface (0-3 feet) stamp sands, tailings, and slag piles at
the frequency of approximately one composite sample per 20 acre-parcel.
Data generated reflected similar chemical characteristics in all
samples collected. This data was sufficient to assume homogeneity of
these materials and to support selection of the Site's remedial action.
    The remedial action included the installation of a soil vegetative
cover over these defined areas of stamp sands, tailings, and slag in
order to meet the Site Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs). The remedial
action only addressed surfurce materials associated with the covered
land parcels. There may be non-Site related contamination with depth or
in the vicinity of these defined areas of stamp sands, tailings, and
slag that are not addressed by this Site remedial action (i.e.,
vegetative cover). This potential contamination was not evaluated or
addressed as part of the remedial measures for the Torch Lake Superfund
Site. Non-Site related contamination, if identified in the future, will
not be addressed by a subsequent action as part of the Torch Lake
Superfund Site's remedial action.

Site History

    Torch Lake was the site of copper milling and smelting facilities
and operations for over 100 years. Torch Lake was a repository of
milling wastes, and served as the waterway transportation to support
the mining industry. The first mill opened on Torch Lake in 1868. At
the mills, copper was extracted by crushing or stamping the rock into
smaller pieces and driving them through successively smaller meshes.
The copper and crushed rocks were separated by gravimetric sorting in a
liquid medium. The copper was sent to a smelter. The crushed rock
particles, called tailings, were discarded along with mill processing
water, typically by pumping them into the Lake.
    Mining output, milling activity, and tailing production peaked in
the Keweenaw Peninsula in the early 1900s to 1920. All of the mills at
Torch Lake were located on the west shore of the Lake and many other
mining mills and smelters were located throughout the Keweenaw
Peninsula. In the early

1900s, advances in technology allowed recovery of copper from tailings
previously deposited in Torch Lake. Dredges were used to collect
submerged tailings which were then screened, recrushed, and gravity
separated. An ammonia leaching process involving cupric ammonium
carbonate was used to recover copper and other metals from conglomerate
tailings. During the 1920s, chemical reagents were used to further
increase the efficiency of reclamation. The chemical reagents included
lime, pyridine oil, coal tar creosotes, wood creosote, pine oil, and
xanthates. After reclamation activities were complete, chemically
treated tailings were returned to the lake. In the 1930s and 1940s, the
Torch Lake mills operated mainly to recover tailings in Torch Lake. In
the 1950s, copper mills were still active; but by the late 1960s,
copper milling had ceased.
    Over 5 million tons of native copper was produced from the Keweenaw
Peninsula and more than half of this was processed along the shores of
Torch Lake. Between 1868 and 1968, approximately 200 million tons of
tailings were dumped into Torch Lake filling at least 20 percent of the
Lake's original volume.
    In June 1972, a discharge of 27,000 gallons of cupric ammonium
carbonate leaching liquor occurred into the north end of Torch Lake
from the storage vats at the Lake Linden Leaching Plant. The Michigan
Water Resources Commission (MWRC) investigated the spill. The 1973 MWRC
report discerned no deleterious effects associated with the spill, but
did observe discoloration of several acres of the lake bottom
indicating previous discharges. In the 1970s, environmental concern
developed regarding the century-long deposition of tailings into Torch
Lake. High concentrations of copper and other heavy metals in Torch
Lake sediments, toxic discharges into the Lake, and fish abnormalities
prompted many investigations into long and short-term impacts
attributed to mine waste disposal. The International Joint Commission's
Water Quality Board designated the Torch Lake basin as a Great Lakes
Area of Concern (AOC) in 1983. Also in 1983, the Michigan Department of
Public Health announced an advisory against the consumption of Torch
Lake sauger and walleye fish due to tumors of unknown origin.
    The Torch Lake Site was proposed for inclusion on the National
Priorities List (NPL) in October of 1984, Federal Register (49 FR
40320). The Site was placed on the NPL in June 1986, (51 FR21054). The
Torch Lake Site is also on the list of sites identified under
Michigan's Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act 451 Part
201. Residential use is planned for these land parcels after they are
deleted from the NPL.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    On May 9, 1988 Special Notice Letters were issued to Universal Oil
Products and Quincy Mining Company to perform a Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS). Universal Oil Products was the successor
corporation of Calumet Hecla Mining Company which operated its milling
and smelting on the shore of Lake Linden and disposed the generated
tailings in the area. On June 13, 1988 a Notice Letter was issued to
Quincy Development Company, which was the current owner of a tailing
pile located on the Lake shore of Mason City. Negotiations for the RI/
FS Consent Order with these Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) were
not successful due to issues such as the extent of the Site, and the
number of PRPs. Subsequently, EPA contracted with Donohue & Associates
in November 1988 to perform the RI/FS at the Site.
    On June 21, 1989 EPA collected a total of eight samples from drums
located in the Old Calumet and Hecla Smelting Mill Site near Lake
Linden, the Ahmeek Mill Site near Hubbell City, and the Quincy Site
near Mason. On August 1, 1990 nine more samples were collected from
drums located above the Tamarack Site near Tamarack City. Based on the
results of these samples, EPA determined that some of these drums may
have contained hazardous substances. During the week of May 8, 1989 EPA
also conducted ground penetrating radar and a sub bottom profile
(seismic) survey of the bottom of Torch Lake. The area in which this
survey was conducted is immediately off-shore from the Old Calumet and
Hecla Smelting Mill Site. The survey located several point targets
(possibly drums) on the bottom of Torch Lake.
    Due to the size and complex nature of the Site, six OUs have been
defined for the Site. OU1, OU2 and OU3 are the remedial OUs; and OU4,
OU5 and OU6 are the removal OUs. OU1 includes surface tailings, drums,
and slag piles on the western shore of Torch Lake. Approximately 500
acres of tailings were previously exposed surficially in OU1. The
Hubbell/Tamarack Tailings, the Lake Linden Tailings and Mason Sands
parcels are included in OU1. OU2 includes groundwater, surface water,
submerged tailings and sediment in Torch Lake, Portage Lake, the
Portage channel, and other surface water bodies at the Site. OU3
includes the North Entry of Lake Superior Tailings, Michigan Smelter
Tailings, Quincy Smelter Tailings, Calumet Lake Tailings, Isle Royale
Tailings, Boston Pond Tailings, and Grosse-Point (Point Mills)
Tailings, and Dollar Bay Tailings. Remedial Investigations have been
completed for all six OUs. The RI for OUs 1 and 3 only investigated the
surface (0-6 inches) and shallow subsurface (0-3 feet) stamp sands. In
addition, the RI assumed that the stamp sands were homogenous, i.e.,
the stamp sands had similar characteristics wherever they were located.
    The sampling performed to characterize the OU3 and OU1 tailings was
adequate to select the Torch Lake Site remedial action based on the
homogeneity of the parameters measured, the distribution of contaminant
compounds, and the relatively low levels of contaminants found. While
hot spot contamination may exist, it is not attributable to tailings
composition, and could not be reliably located or predicted using any
reasonable sampling program. The RI and Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA)
reports for OU1 were finalized in July 1991. The RI and BRA reports for
OU3 were finalized on February 7, 1992.

Record of Decision Findings

    The Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1 and OU3 was signed on
September 30, 1992; and the ROD for OU2 was signed on March 31, 1994.

Operable Unit 1 and Operable Unit 3 ROD (September 30, 1992)

    The selected remedial action for the various tailings areas was a
soil and vegetative cover, and deed restrictions to control the
migration of tailing piles. The cover prevents direct contact exposures
as well as prevents erosion from surface water runoff and the wind. The
cover helps prevent the further degradation of Torch Lake's eco-system,
allowing the Lake to recover over time.
    The RAOs for OU1 and OU3 were developed as a result of data
collected during the RI and included activities to reduce or minimize
the exposure to and release of contaminants in tailings and/or slag
located at the Site. These include:
    1. Reduce or minimize potential risks to human health associated
with the inhalation of airborne contaminants from the tailings and/or
slag located at the Site;
    2. Reduce or minimize potential risks to human health associated
with direct contact with and/or the ingestion of the tailings and/or
the slag located at the Site;

    3. Reduce or minimize the release of contaminants in tailings to
the groundwater through leaching; and
    4. Reduce or minimize the release of contaminants in tailings to
the surface water and sediment by soil erosion and/or air deposition.
    All of the RAOs for the Torch Lake parcels in this deletion package
have been met with the successful implementation of a vegetative cover
over the stamp sands, tailing piles, and slag materials and with the
implementation of deed restrictions which prevent disturbance of the
vegetative covers. The vegetative soil cover reduces airborne and
direct contact exposure to the contaminants in the stamp sands,
tailings, and slag. The affected groundwater is part of OU2, for which
the selected remedy was no action. OU2 was deleted from the NPL in 2002
and since the selected remedy for groundwater was no action, the
reduction or minimization of the release of contaminants in tailings to
the groundwater through leaching does not apply to OU's 1 and 3. The
vegetative soil cover serves to stabilize the stamp sands, tailings,
and slag and reduce the erosion of these materials and their associated
contaminants to the surface water and sediment.
    A 12 acre portion of the Isle Royale tailings in OU3 was excluded
from the area to be covered with soil and vegetation because it was
developed as a sewage treatment facility. The remaining 48 acres was
covered with soil and vegetation by the Portage Lake Water and Sewage
Authority as part of the sewage treatment facility development plan.
    A 90 acre portion of the Isle Royale Tailings was developed as a
residential area and was excluded from the area to be covered with soil
and vegetation.
    A 60 acre area of the Isle Royale Tailings portion is currently
being used to make cement blocks and as a finished block storage area
for the Superior Block Company and was excluded from the area to be
covered with soil and vegetation. The owner and/or operator of Superior
Block Company must use dust control measures such as water spray during
the operation of mining and other activities in order to reduce the
release of dust into the air.

Operable Unit 2 ROD (March 31, 1994)

    The selected remedy for OU2 (groundwater, surface water and
sediments associated with the Site), which is not the focus of this
partial deletion, was ``No Action'' with long-term monitoring and
Institutional Controls with respect to groundwater use. OU2 is impacted
by OU1 and OU3 because wind-blown and eroded tailings from OU1 and OU3
migrate into the surface water and contaminate the sediment. The
contaminated stamp sand serves as a continuing source of
environmentally harmful contamination to the Lake and diminished the
effectiveness of the Lake's natural sedimentation process.

Remedial Design

    In August 1994, an Interagency Agreement (IAG) was signed with the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)-Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) to perform remedial design (RD) work. The
RD was conducted in conformance with the 1992 ROD and was completed for
the entire Site in September 1998.

Construction Activities

    Actual on-site construction began in June 1999 and was completed in
September 2005. A Preliminary Close-Out Report (PCOR) documenting
construction completion was signed on September 23, 2005.

Operable Unit 1

    Mason Sands Tailings (225 acres covered) were covered in October
2002. Just prior to on-site construction activities at Mason Sands, the
USDA-NRCS commissioned Michigan Technological University to conduct an
archaeological survey to evaluate and document the cultural remnants at
the Mason Sands portion of the Site. This was done because of the
numerous historical mining and milling related relics located around
the Mason area and the concern over losing important cultural remnants
as a result of remedy implementation. The results of the survey were
presented in a report dated May 2001, ``Archeological Survey Report of
the Quincy Mining Company Torch Lake Smelter & Reclamation Plant at
Mason Sands Torch Lake EPA Superfund Site'', which was filed in the
EPA's Torch Lake Site Administrative Record. The May 2001 report
concluded that implementation of the remedy at the Mason Sands portion
of the Site would have only a minor negative impact on cultural and
historical values, and therefore, EPA proceeded with remedy
implementation.
    The remedial design specifications were modified during the
implementation phase and sandy soil, consisting of six to ten inches of
sandy-loam soil and a vegetative mat were used in place of topsoil. The
vegetative mat was achieved through a seed mix applied directly on top
of the sandy-loam soil. The seed mix was typically applied at
approximately 90 pounds per acre. The typical seed mix contained six
species of plants, including perennial ryegrass (Lolium perene), tall
fescue (Festuca arundinacea), creeping red fescue (Festica rubra), red
clover (Trifolium pratense), alfalfa (vernal Medicago falcata), and
birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus comiculatus). This mix of plant species was
selected because of their rapid growth rate and relative resilience
with minimal maintenance. Rapid stabilization of the soil cover
material with vegetation was important at the Site in order to avoid
soil washouts and to accommodate the short growing season. Variations
of this seed mix were applied to a small number of areas to accommodate
landowner preference. Overall, the vegetative growth is well
established and is stabilizing the soil portion of the cover material.
    The sandy-loam borrow soil was located and obtained by construction
firms under contract with the USDA-NRCS to implement the remedy and met
modified USDA-NRCS soil specifications. Borrow soils for Mason Sands
were obtained directly across the narrow Torch Lake channel located on
the south-east shore of the Mason Sands. Remedial action construction
activities were performed according to approved design and
specifications at Mason Sands and it is anticipated that the cover
material and shoreline protection will continue to meet remedial action
objectives established for the Site.

Operable Unit 2

    No physical work was required as part of the OU2 No Action ROD,
thus there were no construction activities for this OU. EPA deleted OU2
in the April 2002 partial NPL delisting.

Operable Unit 3

    Remedial action construction activities were performed according to
approved design and specifications at Michigan Smelter Tailings. The
1992 ROD for OU1and OU3 designated some exceptions to the soil cover
for the Isle Royale Tailings area. Theses exceptions included portions
that were being developed or used for other purposes. Areas that were
covered continued the same soil and seed mix as used in OU1. In 2004,
EPA completed the remedy at the Isle Royale Tailings by placing a 6-
inch vegetative cover over area stamp sands and placing rip-rap along
the shoreline of the area. The change to include rip-rap was documented
in a Memo to the File dated July 7, 2004.

Institutional Controls

    In 1994, EPA issued an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC)

to all affected landowners requiring them, within six months of the
AOC, to implement the appropriate deed restriction on their property.
The deed restrictions run with the land and bind future owners to the
restrictions. The institutional controls serve to protect vegetative
cover and thus prevent residual mining contamination from entering
surface water by ensuring that no disturbance of vegetative cover
occurs; or if disturbance occurs, the owner is required to replace soil
and repair vegetative cover. There are Restrictive Covenants on
approximately half of the properties at the Site, which include the
Michigan Smelter Tailings property. The Declaration of Restrictive
Covenants for Isle Royale Tailings was signed on October 14, 2008. The
following restriction applies; ``If during the process of any
development, building, construction, or other activity on the property
by or with consent from the owner of the property, the cover is
disturbed so that upon completion of the development, construction,
building or other activity stamp sand is exposed, then the owner of the
property shall cover the exposed stamp sand and shall re-vegetate the
re-covered area''.

Cleanup Goals

    The objectives of the remedies were to control exposures to Site
contaminants and control erosion of stamp sands, tailings and slag to
the surface water and sediments by covering them with vegetation. The
remedial actions at Isle Royale Tailings, Michigan Smelter Tailings,
and Mason Sands Tailings are operational and functional. The remedial
actions are functioning properly and performing as designed.

Operation and Maintenance (O&M)

    EPA conducted activities necessary to ensure that the implemented
remedy at Isle Royale Tailings, Michigan Smelter Tailings, and Mason
Sands was operational and functional for a period up to three years
after remedial construction at the last parcel. The remedy was jointly
determined by EPA and MDEQ to be functioning properly and performing as
designed in September 2008. EPA conducted annual observations of the
remediated areas for three years after construction, and conducted
major repairs as necessary, on each area where the remedy was
implemented.
    In 2002, EPA conducted a study of terrestrial environments at the
Site to characterize and document the ecological conditions of the
tailing areas before and after implementation of the remedy. The
results of the study were presented in the Torch Lake Stamp Sand
Evaluation Report dated March 2003. The report indicated a significant
environmental improvement. The soil and vegetative cover has resulted
in the development of a soil stabilizing plant community and habitat
which has attracted birds and mammals.
    In 1999 and 2000, as part of long-term monitoring, EPA conducted
environmental sampling as a way to establish the environmental baseline
conditions of Torch Lake. The results of the sampling efforts are
presented in the Baseline Study Report dated August 2001. Future long-
term monitoring events will be conducted by MDEQ and the results
compared to the 2001 baseline study to identify changes and/or
establish trends in lake conditions. MDEQ has had the lead for OU2
monitoring since 2002, when OU2 was deleted from the NPL.
    In 2004, MDEQ conducted sampling activities for monitoring of Torch
Lake. The monitoring was undertaken to document and measure the status
of natural recovery of the Lake following remedial actions. The 2004
sampling work included assessing the benthic community populations,
measuring sediment toxicity to benthic invertebrates, measuring
concentrations of metals and semi-volatile organic compounds in
sediment and groundwater, and studying the sedimentation process in
lake sediments. The 2004 MDEQ long-term monitoring data includes
reports with information relevant to sedimentation rates and sediment
toxicity.
    MDEQ will be conducting O&M of the shoreline protection and cover
material. In accordance with the September 1998 Superfund Site Contract
(SSC) signed by EPA and MDEQ, O&M was to begin three years after the
remedy implementation or when the remedy was jointly determined by EPA
and MDEQ to be functioning properly as designed, whichever is earlier.
This milestone was reached in September 2008 for Isle Royale Tailings,
Michigan Smelter Tailings, and Mason Sands Tailings; along with several
other Torch Lake property parcels.

Five-Year Review (FYR)

    EPA conducted FYRs of the Site in 2003 and 2008. In the reviews,
EPA concluded that all remedial actions are complete. The 2008 FYR
noted that the Isle Royale, Michigan Smelter Tailings and Mason Sands
remedies are protective of human health and the environment in the
short-term. The 2008 FYR calls for continued documentation from
landowners at the Site to verify proper deed restrictions are in place.
The next FYR will be conducted in 2013.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42
U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket, which EPA relied on for
recommendation of the Partial Deletion of this Site from the NPL, are
available to the public in the information repositories, and at
www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket include maps which
identify the specific parcels of land that are proposed in this Notice
(Isle-Royale Tailings, Michigan Smelter Tailings, and Mason Sands).
Additional community outreach will be conducted to ensure the
transparency of the deletion process; to increase awareness of
potential non-Site related environmental issues near the deleted
parcels; and to help the community understand exactly where the deleted
portions of the Torch Lake Site are located.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP

    The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states that portions of a site may be
deleted from the NPL when no further response action is appropriate.
EPA, in consultation with the State of Michigan, has determined that no
further action is appropriate.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Michigan, through MDEQ,
has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA,
other than operation, maintenance, monitoring and five-year reviews,
have been completed. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Isle Royale
Tailings and Michigan Smelter Tailings parcels of OU3 and the Mason
Sands Tailings parcel of OU1 of the Torch Lake Superfund Site from the
NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication. This action will
be effective December 24, 2012 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
November 23, 2012. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of partial deletion before the effective date of
the partial deletion and it will not take effect. EPA may prepare a
response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the
basis of the notice of intent to partially delete and the comments

already received. In such case, there will be no additional opportunity
to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

    Dated: September 19, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region 5.

    For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is
amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

0
2. In table 1 of Appendix B to part 300, under Michigan ``MI'', the
entry for ``Torch Lake'', ``Houghton County, Michigan'' is revised to
read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List

                                       Table 1--General Superfund Section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               State                        Site name              City/County               (Notes)\ a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
MI.................................  Torch Lake............  Houghton..............  P

                                                  * * * * * * *

(a) A = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (if scored, HRS
                                           score need not be >28.50).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P = Sites with partial deletion(s).

[FR Doc. 2012-25968 Filed 10-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30065-30067]
[FR Doc No: E9-14785]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PF09-1-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Supplemental Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Planned 300 Line Project
and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

June 17, 2009.
    As previously noticed on February 4, 2009, and supplemented herein,
the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) is preparing an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts that could result from the
construction and operation of the 300 Line Project. The project is
planned by Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (TGP) to expand the natural
gas transportation capacity of its existing 300 Line pipeline in
northern Pennsylvania and northwestern New Jersey. The EA will be used
by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether
the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This Supplemental Notice of Intent (NOI) announces the opening of a
limited scoping period the Commission will use to gather input from the
public and interested agencies on a new alternative which will be
included in the EA, identified as the Eastern Alternative Loop. This
alternative consists of about 2.2 miles at the eastern end of the
planned Loop 325 in Passaic County, New Jersey and would replace 2.0
miles at the western end of Loop 325. Use of the alternative would
avoid crossing the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge (WRNWR) in
Sussex County, New Jersey, if it is found to be feasible in meeting the
project objectives. Your input will help determine what issues need to
be evaluated in the EA regarding use of the Eastern Alternative Loop.
Please note that this limited scoping period will close on July 17,
2009.
    This notice is being sent to landowners who would be affected by
the Eastern Alternative Loop (including those that would no longer be
affected by the 300 Line Project if this alternative is ultimately
approved by the Commission); Federal, State, and local government
representatives and agencies; environmental and public interest groups;
Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries
and newspapers. We encourage government representatives to notify their
constituents of the Eastern Alternative Loop and encourage them to
comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the planned facilities.
The pipeline company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable
agreement. However, if the 300 Line Project is approved by the
Commission, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain.
Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the
pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance
with State law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' is available for
viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov). This fact
sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the
use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's
proceedings.

Summary of the Planned Project

    TGP plans to request authorization to construct, own, and operate
the facilities necessary to increase natural gas delivery capacity to
the northeast region of the United States by approximately 300,000
dekatherms per day. In addition to increasing natural gas delivery
capacity to the region, TGP would also upgrade certain existing
compressor units to improve overall system reliability.
    The 300 Line Project would consist of the following facilities:
     Installation of approximately 128.4 miles of new 30-inch-
diameter pipeline and associated appurtenant aboveground facilities in
seven separate looping \1\ segments in Potter, Tioga, Bradford,
Susquehanna, Wayne, and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania; and Sussex and
Passaic Counties, New Jersey;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A loop is a segment of pipeline that is usually installed
adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends.
The loop allows more gas to be moved through the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     construction of new compressor stations in Venango and
McKean Counties, Pennsylvania;
     modifications to seven existing compressor stations in
Potter, Tioga, Bradford, Susquehanna, and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania,
and Sussex County, New Jersey, and to an existing meter station in
Bergen County, New Jersey; and
     installation of associated appurtenant aboveground
facilities including mainline valves and pig \2\ launchers and
receivers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry
a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eastern Alternative Loop

    This supplemental NOI concerns only TGP's planned Loop 325 in
Sussex and Passaic Counties, New Jersey. Planned Loop 325 would begin
at milepost (MP) 0.0 in Sussex County, and terminate at MP 17.3 in
Passaic County. As planned, Loop 325 would cross the WRNWR from
approximate MPs 1.0 to 1.8.
    The Eastern Alternative Loop would begin approximately 2.0 miles to
the east of MP 0.0 and end approximately 2.2 miles to the east of MP
17.3. Thus, the alternative would avoid impacts from MPs 0.0 to 2.0 of
Loop 325, including the WRNWR, but would impact areas that would not be
affected by TGP's Loop 325 configuration. The route would remain as
initially planned for the approximately 15.3-mile-long segment between
the eastern and western portions of the loop whether the Commission
would approve either the planned Loop 325 or the Eastern Alternative
Loop.
    Maps depicting Loop 325 and Eastern Alternative Loop are included
in appendix 1.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register but were sent to all those receiving
this notice in the mail. Copies of all appendices are available at
http://www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements

    We have requested that TGP provide additional information regarding
the Eastern Alternative Loop. However, because the length of Loop 325
is similar for TGP's planned configuration and the Eastern Alternative
Loop, land requirements for either configuration are expected to be
similar. In general, Loop 325 would be located within and directly
adjacent to the existing 300 Line right-of-way and at a typical offset
of 25 feet from the existing pipeline to the extent practicable. The
area temporarily disturbed during construction but not required for
operation would generally be allowed to revert to pre-construction
condition and uses. The area required for operation of Loop 325 would
vary depending on the width of TGP's existing right-of-way, but would
generally be maintained in an herbaceous state. Permanent structures
such as buildings would not be allowed within the new, permanent right-
of-way.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\4\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this supplemental NOI, the Commission requests
public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA
regarding the Eastern Alternative Loop. All comments received will be
considered during the preparation of the EA. State and local government
representatives are encouraged to notify their constituents of this
proposed action and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA, we will compare impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of Loop 325 under these general
headings:
     Geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species; and
     public safety.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the planned project
or portions of the project, including the Eastern Alternative Loop. Our
analysis will also include recommendations on how to lessen or avoid
impacts on the various resource areas. Although no formal application
has been filed, we have already initiated our NEPA review under the
Commission's Pre-filing Process. The purpose of the Pre-Filing Process
is to encourage early involvement of interested stakeholders and to
identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the
FERC. As part of our Pre-filing Process review, we have contacted
Federal and State agencies to discuss their involvement in the scoping
process and the preparation of the EA. The FERC is the lead Federal
agency in the preparation of the EA, and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management have agreed to
participate as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA to
satisfy their respective NEPA responsibilities. Representatives from
the FERC also participated in public open houses sponsored by TGP in
the project area in December 2008 and January 2009, to explain the
environmental review process to interested stakeholders. The initial
NOI for this project was issued by the FERC on February 4, 2009. In
addition, we conducted three public scoping meetings in the project
area to hear public concerns and comments on the planned project. One
of these scoping meetings was held near Loop 325 in Vernon, New Jersey,
on February 24, 2009.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be published and mailed to the entities on our mailing list
(see discussion on how to remain on our list under Environmental
Mailing List below). A 30-day comment period will be allotted for
review of the EA. We will consider all comments on the EA before we
make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments are
considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section below.

Currently Identified Environmental Issues

    We have already identified several issues that we think deserve
attention based on a preliminary review of Loop 325 and the Eastern
Alternative Loop. This preliminary list of issues may be changed based
on your comments and our analysis:
     Impacts on the WRNWR, which would be crossed by the
planned Loop 325 but avoided by the Eastern Alternative Loop;
     impacts on lands under jurisdiction of the New Jersey
Highlands Act;
     potential impacts on nearby residences;
     aesthetic impacts, including the loss of trees in forested
areas; and
     potential impacts on threatened or endangered species
including the Indiana bat and the bog turtle.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the Eastern Alternative Loop. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To
ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please send
in your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or
before July 17, 2009.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your written comments to the Commission. In all instances, please
reference the project docket number PF09-1-000 with your submission.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has
dedicated eFiling expert staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the Quick
Comment feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. A Quick
Comment is an easy method for interested persons to submit text-only
comments on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. eFiling involves
preparing your submission in the same manner as you would if filing on
paper, and then saving the file on your computer's hard drive. You will
attach that file as your submission. New eFiling users must first
create an account by clicking on ``Sign up'' or ``eRegister.'' You will
be asked to select the type of filing you are making. A comment on a
particular project is considered a ``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file your comments via mail to the Commission by
sending an original and two copies of your letter to:

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

    In all instances, please reference the project docket number PF09-
1-000 with your submission. Label one copy of the comments for the
attention of Gas Branch 1, PJ-11.1.

Environmental Mailing List

    An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the first 2.0 miles of the planned Loop 325 and the last
2.2 miles of the Eastern Alternative Loop. This includes all landowners
who are potential right-of-way grantors or whose property may be used
temporarily for project purposes.
    If you do not want to send comments at this time but still want to
remain on our mailing list, please return the Information Request
(Appendix 2). If you do not return the Information Request, you will be
taken off the mailing list.

Becoming an Intervenor

    Once TGP formally files its application with the Commission, you
may want to become an ``intervenor,'' which is an official party to the
proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are
able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if
they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor
formally participates in a Commission proceeding by filing a request to
intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are included in the
User's Guide under the ``eFiling'' link on the Commission's Web site.
Please note that you may not request intervenor status at this time;
you must wait until the formal application is filed with the
Commission.

Availability of Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on
the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field. Be
sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance,
please contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The
eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of formal documents
issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Public meetings or site visits will be posted on the Commission's
calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx
along with other related information.
    Finally, to request additional information on the project or to
provide comments directly to the project sponsor, you can contact TGP
directly by calling toll free at 1-866-683-5587. Also, TGP has
established a Web site at http://www.elpaso.com/tgp300lineproject/. The
Web site includes a description of the project, an overview map of the
planned facilities, and links to related documents. TGP will update the
Web site as the environmental review of its project proceeds.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14785 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 15020]
[DOCID:fr02ap09-93]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59638; File No. SR-BX-2009-015]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Order
Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Reduction of Certain Order Handling and Exposure Periods on the Boston
Options Exchange Facility From Three Seconds to One Second

March 27, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On February 27, 2009, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (the ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to reduce
certain order exposure periods on the Boston Options Exchange Facility
from three seconds to one second. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on March 11, 2009.\3\ The
Commission received no comments on the proposal. This order approves
the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(l).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59497 (March 4,
2009), 74 FR 10634 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to reduce certain order
handling and exposure periods in the rules of the Boston Options
Exchange (``BOX'') from three seconds to one second. Specifically, BOX
rules provide that an Options Participant may not cause the execution
of an order it represents as agent on BOX through the use of orders it
solicited unless the agency order is first exposed to the BOX Book for
at least three seconds.\4\ BOX rules also provide that an order flow
provider (``OFP'') may not execute as principal an order it represents
as agent unless the OFP (i) exposes the order to the BOX Book for three
seconds; (ii) has been bidding or offering on BOX for at least three
seconds prior to receiving an agency order that is executable against
such bid or offer; or (iii) sends the agency order to the Price
Improvement Period (``PIP'') or Universal Price Improvement Period
(``UPIP'').\5\ Finally, the duration of the PIP, which allows Options
Participants to designate certain orders for price improvement and
submit such orders to the PIP with a matching contra order, is three
seconds.\6\ Under the proposal, these time periods would be reduced to
one second.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See BOX Rules, Chapter V, Section 17, Supplementary Material
.02.
    \5\ See BOX Rules, Chapter V, Section 17, Supplementary Material
.03.
    \6\ See BOX Rules, Chapter V, Section 18(e)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After carefully reviewing the proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\7\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\
which, among other things, requires that the rules of a national
securities exchange be designed to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. The Commission also finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\9\ which requires
that the rules of an exchange not impose any burden on competition that
is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that, given the electronic environment of
BOX, reducing each of these exposure periods from three seconds to one
second could facilitate the prompt execution of orders, while
continuing to provide market participants with an opportunity to
compete for exposed bids and offers. To substantiate that BOX Options
Participants could receive, process, and communicate a response back to
BOX within one second, BOX stated that it distributed a survey to its
members that would be affected by this proposal or that regularly
participate in the PIP. BOX stated that the survey indicated that it
typically takes at most 110 milliseconds for Participants to receive,
process, and respond to broadcast messages related to the PIP or
facilitation or solicitation related broadcasts and for such responses
to reach BOX.\10\ BOX also stated that the Participants indicated that
reducing the order exposure period to one second would not impair their
ability to participate in solicitation or facilitation orders or orders
executed through the PIP.\11\ Based on BOX's statements regarding the
survey results, the Commission believes that market participants should
continue to have opportunities to compete for exposed bids and offers
within a one second exposure period. Accordingly, the Commission
believes that it is consistent with the Act for the Exchange to reduce
the order handling and exposure times discussed herein from three
seconds to one second.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Notice.
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds good cause to approve the proposed rule change
prior to the thirtieth day after publication for comment in the Federal
Register. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change was
noticed for a fifteen-day comment period, and no comments were
received. The Commission believes that the Exchange has provided
reasonable support for its belief that its market participants would
continue to have an opportunity to compete for exposed bids and offers
if the exposure periods were reduced to one second as proposed.
Finally, the Commission also notes that the proposed rule change is
similar to recently approved proposals submitted by other
exchanges.\12\ Therefore, the Commission finds good cause, consistent
with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\13\ to approve the proposed rule
change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58088 (July
2, 2008), 73 FR 39747 (July 10, 2008) (SR-CBOE-2008-16); 58224 (July
25, 2008), 73 FR 44303 (July 30, 2008) (SR-ISE-2007-94); and 59081
(December 11, 2008), 73 FR 76432 (December 16, 2008) (SR-Phlx-2008-
79).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-BX-2009-015), be, and hereby
is, approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-7353 Filed 4-1-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 153 (Thursday, August 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44460-44461]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17161]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-620, OMB Control No. 3235-0675]

Proposed Collection[s]; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 15Ga-2 and Form ABS-15G

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 15Ga-2 and Form ABS-15G (17 CFR 249.1400) is used for reports
of information required under Rule 15Ga-1 and Rule 15Ga-2 (17 CFR
240.15Ga-1) (17 CFR 240.15Ga-2) of the Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange
Act''). Exchange Act Rule 15Ga-1 requires asset-backed securitizers to
provide disclosure regarding fulfilled an unfulfilled repurchase
requests with respect to asset-backed securities. The purpose of the
information collected on Form ABS-15G is to implement the disclosure
requirements of Section 943 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and

Consumer Protection Act to provide information regarding the use of
representations and warranties in the asset-backed securities markets.
Rule 15Ga-1 had a one-time reporting requirement that expired on
February 14, 2012. We estimate that approximately 1,343 securitizers
will file Form ABS-15G annually at estimated (19.307 hours) burden
hours per response. In addition, we estimate that 75% of the 19.307
hours per response (14.48 hours) is carried internally by the
securitizers for a total annual reporting burden of 19,447 hours (14.48
hours per response x 1,343 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    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 control number.
    Please direct your written comment to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 6, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17161 Filed 8-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 111)]
[Notices]
[Page 27781]
[DOCID:fr11jn09-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-421-000]

Cadeville Gas Storage LLC; Notice of Application

June 4, 2009.
    Take notice that on May 27, 2009, Cadeville Gas Storage
(Petitioner), Three Riverway, Suite 1350, Houston, Texas 77056, filed
with the Commission a petition for Exemption of Temporary Acts and
Operations from Certificate Requirements, pursuant section 7(c)-(1)-(B)
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), and Rule 207-(a)-(5) of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedures. Petitioner requests an exemption for
the temporary and limited purpose of undertaking test well drilling at
a property they control in Ouachita Parish, Louisiana. This test well
drilling is necessary to determine the technical, environmental and
economic feasibility of developing an underground natural gas storage
facility. The activities include the drilling of one reservoir test
well to determine reservoir characteristics and the feasibility of
developing the reservoir for natural gas. All as more fully set forth
in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to
public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://
www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the petition should be directed to counsel
for Cadeville Gas Storage LLC, J. Gordon Pennington, Attorney at Law,
2707 N. Kensington Street, Arlington, VA 22207 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on June 18, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13670 Filed 6-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 167 (Monday, August 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 59210]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20632]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL16-107-000]

Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative, Inc.; Choptank Electric
Cooperative, Inc.; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on August 23, 2016, pursuant to Rule 207 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure,\1\ Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative, Inc. and
Choptank Electric Cooperative, Inc., filed a petition for a declaratory
order requesting that the Commission review regulations promulgated by
the Public Service Commission of Maryland (MD PSC) regarding community
solar energy generation systems (CSEGSs) and to issue a declaratory
order alleging that the MD PSC's CSEGS regulations do not comply with
federal law, including the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act and
the Federal Power Act, all as more fully explained in the petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.207.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 385.211and 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.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    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 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on September 22, 2016.

    Dated: August 23, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-20632 Filed 8-26-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 50 (Friday, March 14, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 14399]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05546]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0115]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Galveston, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the operation of the Galveston Causeway
Railroad Vertical Lift Bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
mile 357.2 west of Harvey Locks, at Galveston, Galveston County, Texas.
The deviation is necessary in order to conduct maintenance on the
bridge. These actions are essential for the continued safe operation of
the bridge. This deviation allows the bridge to remain temporarily
closed to navigation for 10 hours during day light hours and will
operate normally at all other times.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., March 24
through March 28, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2014-0115] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email David Frank, Bridge Administration
Branch, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BNSF Railway Company requested a
temporary deviation from the operating schedule on the the Galveston
Causeway Railroad Vertical Lift Bridge across the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 357.2 west of Harvey Locks, at Galveston, Galveston
County, Texas.
    The bridge has a vertical clearance of 8.0 feet above mean high
water, elevation 3.0 feet NAVD88, in the closed-to-navigation position
and 73 feet above mean high water in the open-to-navigation position.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, the draw shall open on signal for the
passage of vessels.
    This temporary deviation allows the vertical lift bridge to remain
closed to navigation from 7 a.m. through 5 p.m., March 24 through March
28, 2014. The bridge will operate normally at all other times. During
this deviation, the bridge owner will complete periodic maintenance
requirements and grease all operating cables of the bridge.
    Navigation at the site of the bridge consists mainly of tows with
barges and some recreational pleasure craft. Based on known waterway
users, as well as coordination with those waterway users, it has been
determined that this closure will not have a significant effect on
these vessels. No alternate routes are available.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35, the drawbridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation.
    This deviation from the operating regulations is authorized under
33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 26, 2014.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-05546 Filed 3-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 76 (Monday, April 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21845-21846]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08254]

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

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: EC20-43-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company, PG&E Corporation.
    Description: Supplement to March 2, 2020 Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act of Pacific Gas
and Electric Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.

    Accession Number: 20200413-5227.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/27/20.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1120-001.
    Applicants: Paper Birch Energy, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amended MBR Application to be
effective 4/29/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5167.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1457-001.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Power and Light Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Refile--ACEC Wholesale Power
Agreement Amendment to be effective 6/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5210.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1460-001.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Power and Light Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Refile--REC Amendment to WPA to be
effective 6/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5213.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1461-001.
    Applicants: Wisconsin Power and Light Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Refile--CWEC Amendment to WPA to be
effective 6/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5214.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1525-000.
    Applicants: Eastern Landfill Gas, LLC.
    Description: Amendment to April 8, 2020 Waiver Request of Eastern
Landfill Gas, LLC under ER20-1525. (Replaces 20200408-5021).
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5226.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/29/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1558-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Lincoln Solar LGIA--
unexecuted to be effective 6/13/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1559-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing of Rate Schedule FERC
No. 281, CTP Methodology to be effective 4/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200413-5216.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1560-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3644 ETEC Attachment AO to
be effective 3/31/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200414-5005.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1561-000.
    Applicants: Virginia Electric and Power Company, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Dominion submits Revisions
to OATT, Att. H-16C re: Other Post-Employment Benefit to be effective
6/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200414-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1562-000.
    Applicants: Midlands Solar LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: baseline new to be effective
4/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200414-5125.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1563-000.
    Applicants: Midlands Lessee LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: baseline new to be effective
4/15/2020.
    Filed Date: 4/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200414-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/20.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES20-23-000.
    Applicants: Mississippi Power Company.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of Mississippi Power Company.
    Filed Date: 4/14/20.
    Accession Number: 20200414-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/20.

    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: April 14, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-08254 Filed 4-17-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P