[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9227-9229]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3566]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0018]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Havasu Landing Regatta, Colorado River, Lake Havasu
Landing, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on
Lake Havasu, California in support of the Havasu Landing Regatta. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other
vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited
from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety
zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on February 19, 2011, to 4
p.m. on February 20, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0018 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0018 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Shane Jackson, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego; Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7267, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. The
logistical details of the race were neither finalized nor presented to
the Coast Guard with enough forewarning to draft and publish an NPRM.
As such, the event will occur before the rulemaking process could be
completed.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date would
be contrary to the public interest, since immediate action is needed to
ensure public safety.

Background and Purpose

    We are establishing this temporary safety zone in support of the
Havasu Landing Regatta, a marine event that includes vessels racing
along an established and marked course on Lake Havasu, CA. A temporary
safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crews,
spectators, and participants of the race and is also necessary to
protect other vessels and users of the waterway.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that will be enforced
from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday, February 19, and Sunday, February
20, 2011. The limits of this safety zone are as follows: From the
California shoreline in

position 34[deg]29.40' N 114[deg]24.12' W to the northern corner 900
yards east in position 34[deg]29.40' N 114[deg]23.39' W to the southern
corner 1400 yards south in position 34[deg]29.0' N 114[deg]23.39' W to
the California shoreline in position 34[deg]29.0' N 114[deg]24.12' W.
    This safety zone is necessary to ensure unauthorized personnel and
vessels remain safe by keeping clear of the race course during the
event. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. The safety zone is of a limited duration,
only eight hours per day for a period of two days, and is limited to a
relatively small geographic area.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    The safety zone will affect the following entities some of which
may be small entities: The owners and operators of pleasure craft
engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing in the impacted
portion of Lake Havasu on February 19 and 20, 2011. This safety zone
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities for several reasons. Vessel traffic can pass safely
around the area, vessels engaged in recreational activities have ample
space outside of the safety zone to engage in these activities, and
this safety zone is limited in scope and duration as it is only in
effect for eight hours per day for a period of two days.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling

procedures; and related management systems practices) that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
safety zone.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-392 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-392  Safety Zone; Havasu Landing Regatta, Colorado River,
Lake Havasu Landing, CA.

    (a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will be the navigable
waters of Lake Havasu bounded by the following coordinates: from the
California shoreline in position 34[deg]29.40' N 114[deg]24.12' W to
the northern corner 900 yards east in position 34[deg]29.40' N
114[deg]23.39' W to the southern corner 1,400 yards south in position
34[deg]29.0' N 114[deg]23.39' W to the California shoreline in position
34[deg]29.0' N 114[deg]24.12' W.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This section will be in effect from 8 a.m.
on February 19th to 4 p.m. on February 20, 2011. It will be enforced
from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. each day (February 19, 2011 and February 20,
2011). If the event concludes prior to the scheduled termination time,
the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone and
will announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
Designated representative, means any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary,
and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who have been
authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port of San Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety
zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander
(PATCOM). The PATCOM may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
    (4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel
shall proceed as directed.
    (5) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.

    Dated: February 3, 2011.
T.H. Farris,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2011-3566 Filed 2-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11350-11351]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4650]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1994-0001; FRL-9274-1]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the AT&SF Albuquerque
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 announces
the deletion of the northern 62-acre parcel of the AT&SF Albuquerque
Superfund Site (Site) located in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New
Mexico, 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 of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This partial deletion pertains to the soil and
ground water associated with the northern 62-acre parcel. After this
deletion, these 62 acres will no longer be part of the Site. The other
27 acres will remain on the NPL and are not being considered for
deletion as part of this action. The EPA and the State of New Mexico,
through the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), have determined
that all appropriate response actions for this parcel under CERCLA,
other than operation, maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been
completed. However, the deletion of these parcels does not preclude
future actions under Superfund.

DATES: Effective Date: This action is effective March 2, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1994-0001. All documents in the docket
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the site information repositories. Locations, contacts,
and phone numbers are:
     U.S. EPA Region 6 Library, 7th Floor, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733,<PHONE_NUMBER>;
     Albuquerque Public Library, Main Downtown Branch, 501
Copper Avenue, NW., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102, Contact: John
Vittal; and,
     New Mexico Environment Department, Harold Runnels
Building, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katrina Higgins-Coltrain, Remedial
Project Manager (RPM), U.S. EPA Region 6 (6SF-RL), 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, TX 75202-2733,<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-533-3508
(coltrain.katrina@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The portion of the site to be deleted from the NPL is: Northern 62-
acre parcel of the AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site, located in
Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico. A Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion for this Site was published in the Federal Register on
January 5, 2011 (76 FR 510).
    The closing date for comments on the Notice of Intent for Partial
Deletion was February 4, 2011. One anonymous public comment was
received and supported the partial deletion of the Site. EPA, in
conjunction with the NMED, believes the partial deletion action remains
appropriate.
    EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to present a
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude further remedial
action. 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. Deletion of portions of a
site from the NPL does not affect responsible party liability, in the
unlikely event that future conditions warrant further actions.

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: February 16, 2011.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, 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.

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by revising the entry
under NM for ``AT&SF (Albuquerque)'' to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List

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

                                                  * * * * * * *
NM..................................  AT&SF Albuquerque......  Albuquerque............  P

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

[FR Doc. 2011-4650 Filed 3-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 35)]
[Notices]
[Page 8246-8247]
[DOCID:fr24fe09-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-58-000]

Rockies Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of Application

February 17, 2009.
    Take notice that on February 3, 2009, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC
(Rockies Express) 370 Van Gordon Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80228,
filed an application in Docket No. CP09-58-000, pursuant to section
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's
regulations, requesting a certificate of public convenience and
necessity to construct and operate facilities to expand the capacity of
its system in Zone 1 by 200,000 Dth per day. Specifically, Rockies
Express proposes to increase compression at two certificated compressor
stations: (1) Big Hole Compressor Station in Moffat County, Colorado--
one new 20,500 horsepower (hp) unit; and (2) Arlington Compressor
Station in Carbon County, Wyoming--one new 17,500 hp unit. Rockies
Express requests a determination that rolled-in rate treatment is
appropriate for the proposed facilities.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Robert F. Harrington, Vice President, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC,
P.O. Box 281304, Lakewood, Colorado 80228-8304, telephone no. (303)
763-3258, and e-mail: Robert--Harrington@ kindermorgan.com.
    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.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Comment Date: March 10, 2009.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-3853 Filed 2-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 104)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30775-30782]
[DOCID:fr29my08-17]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0844, FRL-8572-1]
RIN 2060-A039

Method 207--Pre-Survey Procedure for Corn Wet-Milling Facility
Emission Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action to add Method 207 to the
promulgated test methods in 40 CFR Part 51. Appendix M contains
recommended test methods that are provided for the States to use in
their State Implementation Plans. Therefore, this method may be used as
an alternative to existing test methods for measuring volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions. This pre-survey method was developed by the
corn wet-milling industry specifically to VOC mass emissions from
processes within the corn wet-milling industry. It provides a
systematic approach to develop a specific list of target organic
compounds and the appropriate methods to measure those target compounds
during subsequent VOC emissions testing. After using the pre-survey
procedure, the tester will have sufficient information to design a
comprehensive testing program using Method 18 and other appropriate
methods to measure the mass of VOC emissions during the actual
emissions testing. This method is an alternative to existing test
methods and does not add any new reporting requirements to the
reporting requirements that already exist. While it is an alternative
method, it is the recommended method for measuring VOC mass emissions
from corn wet-milling facilities.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on August 27, 2008 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 30, 2008.
If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2007-0844, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0844, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), Mail code:
2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please
include a total of two copies.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West (Air Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue, Northwest, Room 3334,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0844.
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-OAR-
2007-0844. 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 e-
mail. 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or

viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm.
    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 hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gary McAlister, Air Quality
Assessment Division (E143-02), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
    B. Does This Action Apply to Me?
    C. Judicial Review
II. Background
    A. What Is the Basis for This New Method?
    B. What Procedures Are Included in EPA Method 207?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. General Information

A. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?

    The EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule
because we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no
adverse comment. This action adds a method to the list of recommended
methods in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M. The method may be used as an
alternative method to existing recommended methods, but it is not
required to be used by any existing rule. In the ``Proposed Rules''
section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposed rule to add Method 207 to
Appendix M in 40 CFR Part 51 if adverse comments are received on this
direct final rule. We will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time. For Further information about commenting on this rule, see the
ADDRESSES section of this document. If EPA receives adverse comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that this direct final rule will not take effect. We would
address all public comments in any subsequent final rules based on the
proposed rule.

B. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    Method 207 affects/applies to the corn wet-milling industry and is
used specifically to measure VOC mass emissions from processes within
the corn wet-milling industry. Therefore, the categories and entities
potentially regulated by this action include the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Examples of regulated
             Category               NAICS \a\           entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.........................       311221  Corn wet-milling.
State/local/tribal government....       924110  State, local, and tribal
                                                 air quality management
                                                 programs that regulate
                                                 corn wet-milling.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.

C. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of this direct final rule is available by filing a petition for review
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by July 28, 2008. Only those objections to this final rule that
were raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public
comment may be raised during judicial review. Under section 307 (b)(2)
of the CAA, the requirements that are the subject of this direct final
rule may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.

II. Background

A. What Is the Basis for This New Method?

    The Method 207 Pre-Survey Procedure for Corn Wet-Milling Facility
Emission Sources was developed in collaboration with the corn wet-
milling industry (i.e., Corn Refiners Association (CRA)) specifically
to measure volatile organic compound (VOC) mass emissions from
processes within their facilities on an individual species basis. The
pre-survey procedure provides a systematic approach to develop a
specific list of target organic compounds and the appropriate sampling
approach to collect those target compounds during subsequent VOC
emissions testing. After using the new pre-survey procedure, the tester
will have sufficient information to design a comprehensive testing
program using Method 18 and other appropriate methods to measure the
mass of VOC emissions during the actual emissions testing. The CRA
submitted their proposed procedures and supporting information to the
EPA for review, and we concluded that it was an acceptable procedure
for measuring VOC emissions from corn wet-milling facilities.
    For the purposes of measuring VOC emissions from corn wet-milling
facilities, all of the sampling procedures in Method 18 may be used, as
well as an additional sampling procedure using water filled impingers
to collect water soluble VOC. This sampling procedure is described in
detail in Method 308 (40 CFR Part 63) and NCASI Method CI/SG/PULP-
94.03. The resulting water samples should also be analyzed using the
procedures in Method 308 or NCASI

Method CI/SG/PULP-94.03. If formaldehyde is a target compound, it may
be collected with the water-filled impinger collection system, but the
sample must be analyzed by procedures other than those in EPA Method
18. Examples of acceptable analytical procedures are those in Method
316 (40 CFR Part 63) or NCASI Method CI/SG/PULP-94.02.

B. What Procedures Are Included in EPA Method 207?

    In this action, we are amending Title V, Part 51, Appendix M of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) by adding a new measurement technique
for VOC emissions from corn wet-milling facilities, referred to as
``EPA Method 207--Pre-Survey Procedure for Corn Wet-Milling Facility
Emission Sources.'' This method provides procedures for establishing
analytes for subsequent EPA Method 18 testing to determine the total
mass emissions of VOC from sources at corn wet-milling facilities.
Objectives of the method include:
    (1) Identification of physical characteristics of the VOC contained
in the effluent;
    (2) Determination of the appropriate Method 18 sampling approach to
ensure efficient collection of all VOC present in the effluent;
    (3) Development of a specific list of target compounds to be
quantified during the subsequent total VOC test program; and
    (4) Qualification of the list of target compounds as being a true
representation of the total VOC.
    The procedures call for using flame ionization detection in
conjunction with various configurations of impingers, and other
absorbents, or adsorbents to determine the best EPA Method 18 sampling
train configuration for the assessment and capture of VOC. Volatile
organic compound analytes present in the exhaust air from production
processes located at corn wet-milling facilities typically fall into
five general categories: Alcohols, aldehydes, acetate esters, ketones,
and carboxylic acids, and typically contain fewer than six carbon
atoms.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is,
therefore, not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). It adds a test method to the
recommended methods in Appendix M of 40 CFR Part 51. This method is an
alternative to existing test methods and does not add any new reporting
requirements to the reporting requirements that already exist.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any
not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility
analyses is to identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which
minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small
entities.'' U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has
a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the
rule. This action establishes voluntary alternative test procedures for
satisfying the requirements of EPA Method 18, Section 16 (pre-survey),
which are used to determine the mass VOC emissions from processes
within the corn wet-milling industry, by specifying the analytes for
subsequent EPA Method 18 testing. This rule does not impose any new
requirements or create impacts on small entities. Therefore, this
action is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This
action adds a new test method for measuring VOC air emissions to the
recommended methods in 40 CFR part 51. Because this method is an
alternative method, its use is voluntary. It will not impose
requirements on State, local governments, or tribal governments. Thus,
this action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Because this method is an
alternative method, its use is voluntary. It will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on State or local governments, nor
will it preempt State law. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The final
action would add a test method that could be used as an alternative to
existing methods. It does not add any new requirements and does not
affect VOC emissions or air quality. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

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

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    The rulemaking involves technical standards. Therefore, the Agency
conducted a search to identify potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards. However, we identified no such standards, and none
were brought to our attention in comments. Therefore, EPA has decided
to use Method 207 to measure mass VOC emissions from processes within
the corn-wet milling industry. This method provides a systematic
approach to develop a specific list of target organic compounds and the
appropriate methods to measure those target compounds during subsequent
VOC emissions testing.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action adds a new test method for measuring VOC air
emissions to the recommended methods in 40 CFR Part 51. It does not
change any existing rules that limit VOC air emission limits.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective on August 27, 2008.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Dated: May 21, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 51--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

0
2. Part 51 is amended in appendix M by adding Method 207 in numerical
order to read as follows:

Appendix M to Part 51--Recommended Test Methods for State
Implementation Plans

* * * * *

METHOD 207--PRE-SURVEY PROCEDURE FOR CORN WET-MILLING FACILITY EMISSION
SOURCES

1.0 Scope and Application

    1.1 Analyte. Total gaseous organic compounds.
    1.2 Applicability. This pre-survey method is intended for use at
corn wet-milling (CWM) facilities to satisfy the requirements of
Method 18, Section 16 (Pre-survey). This procedure establishes the
analytes for subsequent Method 18 testing to determine the total
mass emissions of VOCs from sources at CWM facilities. The specific
objectives of the pre-survey procedure are:
    1.2.1 Identify the physical characteristics of the VOC contained
in the effluent.
    1.2.2 Determine the appropriate Method 18 sampling approach to
ensure efficient collection of all VOC present in the effluent.
    1.2.3 Develop a specific list of target compounds to be
quantified during the subsequent total VOC test program.
    1.2.4 Qualify the list of target compounds as being a true
representation of the total VOC.
    1.3 Range. The lower and upper ranges of this procedure are
determined by the sensitivity of the flame ionization detector (FID)
instruments used. Typically, gas detection limits for the VOCs will
be on the order of 1-5 ppmv, with the upper limit on the order of
100,000 ppmv.

2.0 Summary of Method

    Note: Method 6, Method 18, and Method 25A as cited in this
method refer to the methods in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A.

    This procedure calls for using an FIA in conjunction with
various configurations of impingers, and other absorbents, or
adsorbents to determine the best EPA Method 18 sampling train
configuration for the assessment and capture of VOCs. VOC compounds
present in the exhaust gas from processes located at CWM facilities
fall into five general categories: Alcohols, aldehydes, acetate
esters, ketones, and carboxylic acids, and typically contain fewer
than six carbon atoms. This pre-survey protocol characterizes and
identifies the VOC species present. Since it is qualitative in
nature, quantitative performance criteria do not apply.

3.0 Definitions

    3.1 Calibration drift means the difference in the measurement
system response to a mid-level calibration gas before and after a
stated period of operation during which no unscheduled maintenance,
repair, or adjustment took place.
    3.2 Calibration error means the difference between the gas
concentration indicated by the measurement system and the known
concentration of the calibration gas.
    3.3 Calibration gas means a known concentration of a gas in an
appropriate diluent gas.
    3.4 Measurement system means the equipment required for the
determination of the gas concentration. The system consists of the
following major subsystems:
    3.4.1 Sample interface means that portion of a system used for
one or more of the following: Sample acquisition, sample
transportation, sample conditioning, or protection of the
analyzer(s) from the effects of the stack effluent.
    3.4.2 Organic analyzer means that portion of the measurement
system that senses the gas to be measured and generates an output
proportional to its concentration.
    3.5 Response time means the time interval from a step change in
pollutant concentration at the inlet to the emission measurement
system to the time at which 95 percent of the corresponding final
value is reached as displayed on the recorder.
    3.6 Span Value means the upper limit of a gas concentration
measurement range that is specified for affected source categories
in the applicable part of the regulations. The span value is
established in the applicable regulation and is usually 1.5 to 2.5
times the applicable emission limit. If no span value is provided,
use a span value equivalent to 1.5 to 2.5 times the expected
concentration. For convenience, the span value should correspond to
100 percent of the recorder scale.
    3.7 Zero drift means the difference in the measurement system
response to a zero level calibration gas before or after a stated
period of operation during which no unscheduled maintenance, repair,
or adjustment took place.

4.0 Interferences [Reserved]

5.0 Safety [Reserved]

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

    6.1 Organic Concentration Analyzer. A flame ionization analyzer
(FIA) with heated detector block and sample handling system, meeting
the requirements of USEPA Method 25A.
    6.2 Heated Sampling System. A sampling system consisting of a
stainless steel probe with particulate filter, Teflon[supreg] sample
line, and sampling pump capable of moving 1.0 l/min through the
sample probe and line. The entire system from probe tip to FIA
analyzer must have the capability to maintain all sample-wetted
parts at a temperature >120[deg]C. A schematic of the heated
sampling system and impinger train is shown in Figure 1 of this
method.
    6.3 Impinger Train. EPA Method 6 type, comprised of three midget
impingers with appropriate connections to the sampling system and
FIA system. The impinger train may be chilled in an ice bath or
maintained at a set temperature in a water bath as indicated by the
operator's knowledge of the source and the compounds likely to be
present. Additional impingers or larger impingers may be used for
high moisture sources.
    6.4 Adsorbent tubes.
    6.4.1 Silica gel, SKC Type 226-22 or equivalent, with
appropriate end connectors and holders.
    6.4.2 Activated carbon, SKC Type 226-84 or equivalent, with
appropriate end connectors and holders.
    6.5 Tedlar bag. 24 liter, w/ Roberts valve, for GC/MS analysis
of ``breakthrough'' VOC fraction as needed.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

    7.1 Organic-free water, HPLC, or pharmaceutical grade.
    7.2 Calibration Gases. The calibration gases for the gas
analyzer shall be propane in air or propane in nitrogen. If organic
compounds other than propane are used, the appropriate corrections
for response factor must be available and applied to the results.
Calibration gases shall be prepared in accordance with the procedure
listed in Citation 2 of section 16. Additionally, the manufacturer
of the cylinder must provide a recommended shelf life for each
calibration gas cylinder over which the concentration does not
change more than  2 percent from the certified value.
For calibration gas values not generally available (i.e., organics
between 1 and 10 percent by volume), alternative methods for
preparing calibration gas mixtures, such as dilution systems (Test
Method 205, 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M), may be used with prior
approval of the Administrator.
    7.3 Fuel. A 40 percent H2/60 percent N2 or He gas mixture is
recommended to avoid an oxygen synergism effect that reportedly
occurs when oxygen concentration varies significantly from a mean
value.
    7.4 Zero Gas. High purity air with less than 0.1 parts per
million by volume (ppmv) of organic material (propane or carbon
equivalent) or less than 0.1 percent of the span value, whichever is
greater.
    7.5 Low-level Calibration Gas. An organic calibration gas with a
concentration equivalent to 25 to 35 percent of the applicable span
value.
    7.6 Mid-level Calibration Gas. An organic calibration gas with a
concentration equivalent to 45 to 55 percent of the applicable span
value.
    7.7 High-level Calibration Gas. An organic calibration gas with
a concentration equivalent to 80 to 90 percent of the applicable
span value.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation and Storage

    8.1 Configuration. The configuration of the pre-survey sampling
system is provided in Figure 1. This figure shows the primary
components of the sampling system needed to conduct a VOC survey. A
dual-channel analyzer is beneficial, but not necessary. Only a
single channel is indicated in the figure.
    8.2 Sampling. The pre-survey system should be set up and
calibrated with the targeted sampling flow rate that will be used
during Method 18 VOC sampling. The targeted flow rate for capture of
most

expected VOC species is 400 cc/min. Since most FIA analyzers do not
specifically allow for adjusting the total sample flow rate (only
the back pressure), it may be necessary to insert a flow control
valve at the sample inlet to the FIA. The total sample flow can be
measured at the FIA bypass, since only a small fraction of the
sample flow is diverted to analysis portion of the instrument.
    The sampling system configuration shown in Figure 1 is operated
using the process flow diagram provided in Figure 2. As noted in the
process flowchart, the initial sampling media consists of the three
midget impingers. The attenuation of the VOC sample stream is
evaluated to determine if 95 percent or greater attenuation
(capture) of the VOCs present has been achieved. The flow diagram
specifies successive adjustments to the sampling media that are
utilized to increase VOC capture.
    A one-hour test of the final sampling configuration is performed
using fresh media to ensure that significant breakthrough does not
occur. Additional sampling media (more water, silica or carbon
tubes) may be added to ensure that breakthrough is not occurring for
the full duration of a test run.
    If 95 percent or greater attenuation has not been achieved after
inserting all indicated media, the most likely scenario is that
methane is present. This is easily checked by collecting a sample of
this final bypass sample stream and analyzing for methane. There are
other VOC compounds which could also penetrate the media. Their
identification by gas chromatography followed by mass spectrometry
would be required if the breakthrough cannot be accounted for by the
presence of methane.

9.0 Quality Control

    9.1 Blanks. A minimum of one method blank shall be prepared and
analyzed for each sample medium employed during a pre-survey testing
field deployment to assess the effect of media contamination. Method
blanks are prepared by assembling and charging the sample train with
reagents, then recovering and preserving the blanks in the same
manner as the test samples. Method blanks and test samples are
stored, transported and analyzed in identical fashion as the test
samples.
    9.2 Synthetic Sample (optional). A synthetic sample may be used
to assess the performance of the VOC characterization apparatus with
respect to specific compounds. The synthetic sample is prepared by
injecting appropriate volume(s) of the compounds of interest into a
Tedlar bag containing a known volume of zero air or nitrogen. The
contents of the bag are allowed to equilibrate, and the bag is
connected to the sampling system. The sampling system, VOC
characterization apparatus and FIA are operated normally to
determine the performance of the system with respect to the VOC
compounds present in the synthetic sample.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

    10.1 Calibration. The FIA equipment is able to be calibrated for
almost any range of total organic concentrations. For high
concentrations of organics (>1.0 percent by volume as propane),
modifications to most commonly available analyzers are necessary.
One accepted method of equipment modification is to decrease the
size of the sample to the analyzer through the use of a smaller
diameter sample capillary. Direct and continuous measurement of
organic concentration is a necessary consideration when determining
any modification design.

11.0 Procedure

    11.1 Analytical Procedure. Upon completion of the pre-survey
sampling, the sample fractions are to be analyzed by an appropriate
chromatographic technique. (Ref: Method 18) The resulting
chromatograms must be reviewed to ensure that the ratio of known
peak area to total peak area is 95% or greater. It should be noted
that if formaldehyde is a suspected analyte, it must be quantitated
separately using a different analytical technique.

12.0 Data Analysis and Calculations

    Chromatogram peaks will be ranked from greatest area to least
area using peak integrator output. The area of all peaks will then
be totaled, and the proportion of each peak area to the total area
will be calculated. Beginning with the highest ranked area, each
peak will be identified and the area added to previous areas until
the cumulative area comprises at least 95% of the total area. The
VOC compounds generating those identified peaks will comprise the
compound list to be used in Method 18 testing of the subject source.

13.0 Method Performance [Reserved]

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 References

    16.1 CFR 40 Part 60, Appendix A, Method 18, Measurement of
Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography.
    16.2 CFR 40 Part 60, Appendix A, Method 25A, Determination of
Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Flame Ionization
Analyzer.
    16.2 CFR 40 Part 60, Appendix A, Method 6, Determination of
Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from Stationary Sources.
    16.3 National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI),
Method CI/WP-98.01 ``Chilled Impinger Method for Use at Wood
Products Mills to Measure Formaldehyde, Methanol, and Phenol.

17. Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MY08.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29MY08.001

[FR Doc. E8-11882 Filed 5-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C


DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise

Chambers Works

Deepwater, NJ  08023

CERTIFIED MAIL – Return Receipt Requested

October 30, 2008

Document Control Office

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 6428

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Re: 	EPA – HQ – OPPT – 2003 - 0012

	DuPont Chambers Works NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005100

	PFOA Data Submittal – Outfall DSN662 Weekly Grab Samples

	August 2008 Sample Data

Dear Document Control Office:

As per Part IV, Section G.5.a of the NJPDES permit, we are submitting a summary of PFOA analytical results for the weekly grab samples taken at internal outfall DSN662A to NJDEP on a monthly basis. Per your request, we are sending you a paper and electronic copy of the report for samples taken during August 2008. We will continue to send you the reports each month.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (856) 540-3015.

Sincerely,

Karen L. Pinder

SET Environmental Coordinator

DuPont Chambers Works

Enclosures

Copies to:

Director, Chemical Control Division

US Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

EPA East

Room 4146

1201 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20004

Ms. Susan Rosenwinkel (cover letter only)

Principal Environmental Engineer

NJDEP Division of Water Quality

Bureau of Point Source Permitting – Region 2

401 E. State Street

P.O. Box 029

Trenton, NJ 08625-0029


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7151-7153]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03625]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85187; File No. SR-ICEEU-2019-002]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Amendments to the ICE Clear Europe Delivery Procedures

February 25, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 15, 2019, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'' or
the ``Clearing House'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule changes described in
Items I, II and III below, which Items have been prepared by ICE Clear
Europe. ICE Clear Europe filed the proposed rule change pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(4)(ii)
thereunder,\4\ so that the proposal was immediately effective upon
filing. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed amendments is for ICE Clear
Europe to to [sic] add delivery terms relating to the ICE Futures
Europe (``ICE Futures Europe'' or ``IFEU'') Permian West Texas
Intermediate Crude Oil Storage Futures Contracts (the
``Contracts'').\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meaning specified in the ICE Clear Europe Clearing Rules (the
``Rules'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(a) Purpose
    ICE Clear Europe is amending its Delivery Procedures to add a new
Section 10 and a new Part DD regarding delivery procedures relating to
a new Contract that will be traded on ICE Futures Europe and cleared by
ICE Clear Europe.
    New Part DD sets out the delivery specifications and procedures for
deliveries of storage capacity under the Contract. Delivery is effected
by Magellan Crude Oil Pipeline Company, L.P. (``Magellan'') providing
to the buyer a Capacity Allocation Contract (``CAC'') \6\ for storage
of one or more increments of 1,000 barrels of Permian West Texas
Intermediate crude oil for a named calendar month at Magellan's East
Houston terminal (``MEH''). The amendments also establish standards for
the storage provided, as well as relevant procedures for exchange of
futures for physical transactions under exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This is a standardized agreement between Magellan and a
buyer providing the contractual right to use designated Permian WTI
Storage in the delivery month as further detailed in the Permian WTI
Storage Contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Part DD addresses certain the responsibilities of the Clearing
House and relevant parties for delivery under the Contracts,
supplementing the existing provisions of the Rules. Specifically,
neither the Clearing House nor ICE Futures Europe are responsible for
the performance of Magellan or any person operating MEH, nor do they
give any undertaking or warranty to any person as to the effect of the
Contract Terms and Delivery Procedures as regards title to Permian WTI
Storage. Further, neither the Clearing House nor ICE Futures Europe
will have any liability for the condition of the Magellan storage
system or for the performance by Magellan or any person who operates
such system of any responsibilities they may assume towards Clearing
Members or other persons pursuant to the Contract Terms, except for
liability for fraud or bad faith or liability which cannot lawfully be
excluded. Neither the Clearing House nor ICE Futures Europe has any
obligation to any person to ensure the accuracy or availability of any
information in Magellan's records in relation to storage rights arising
from CACs in relation to Permian WTI Storage.
    Part DD addresses delivery margin and invoicing with respect to the
Contract and specifies certain details of the delivery process.
Delivery of Contracts will be based on open contract positions at the
close of trading on the last trading day for which physical delivery is
specified. The procedures include a detailed timeframe for relevant
notices of intent to deliver or receive, nominations of parties to
delivery or receive, delivery confirmations, invoicing, release of
delivery margin following completion of delivery and other matters.
    New Section 10 addresses alternative delivery procedures (ADP) that
the parties to a Contract may agree in lieu of the standard delivery
arrangements in Part DD and relevant exchange rules. Section 10
addresses procedures for requesting such an alternative arrangement,
disclosure of the counterparty (if amenable to an alternative
arrangement), and confirmation and settlement of the alternative
arrangement.

(b) Statutory Basis
    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \7\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions and,
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions, the safeguarding of securities and funds in the custody
or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible, and
the protection of investors and the public interest. The proposed
amendments are designed to facilitate the clearing of a new physically
settled crude oil storage futures contract that is being launched for
trading by the ICE Futures Europe exchange. The amendments set out the
obligations and roles of Clearing Members, the Clearing House and
Magellan, the relevant storage facility for purposes of the Contracts.
ICE Clear Europe believes that its financial resources, risk
management, systems and operational arrangements are sufficient to
support clearing of such products (and to address physical delivery
under such contracts) and to manage the risks associated with such
contracts. As a result, in ICE Clear Europe's view, the amendments will
be consistent with the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
the Contracts, and the protection of investors and the public interest
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\8\
In ICE Clear Europe's view, the amendments will not affect the
safeguarding of funds or securities in the custody or control of the
clearing agency or for which it is responsible, within the meaning of
Section 17A(b)(3)(F).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Rule 17Ad-22(e)(10) \10\ requires that each covered
clearing agency establish and maintain transparent written standards
that state its obligations with respect to the delivery of physical
instruments, and establish and maintain operational practices that
identify, monitor and manage the risks associated with such physical
deliveries. As discussed above, the amendments to the Delivery
Procedures to allow for the delivery and settlement under the
Contracts, taken together with the Rules and ICE Futures Europe
exchange contract terms, set out the obligations and roles of Clearing
Members, the Clearing House and Magellan, the relevant storage facility
for purposes of the Contracts. The amendments also adopt relevant
procedures for such deliveries, which will facilitate identifying,
monitoring and managing risks associated with delivery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the proposed rule changes would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The changes are
being proposed in order to update the Delivery Procedures in connection
with the listing of the Contracts for trading on the ICE Futures Europe
market. ICE Clear Europe believes that such contracts will provide
opportunities for interested market participants to engage in trading
activity in the Permian WTI storage market. ICE Clear Europe does not
believe the amendments would adversely affect competition among
Clearing Members, materially affect the cost of clearing, adversely
affect access to clearing in Contracts for Clearing Members or their
customers, or otherwise adversely affect competition in clearing
services. Accordingly, ICE Clear Europe does not believe that the
amendments would impose any impact or burden on competition that is not
appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed amendments have not been
solicited or received by ICE Clear Europe. ICE Clear Europe will notify
the Commission of any comments received with respect to the proposed
amendments.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \12\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2019-002 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2019-002. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe and on ICE
Clear Europe's website at https://www.theice.com/clear-europe/regulation. All comments received will be posted without change.
Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2019-002 and should be
submitted on or before March 22, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-03625 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27588-27589]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11017]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RD14-5-000]

Proposed Agency Information Collection

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) invites
public comment in Docket No. RD14-5-000 on a proposed collection of
information that the Commission is developing for submission to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be 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.

DATES: Comments regarding this proposed information collection must be
received on or before July 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
     Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver an original of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed information collection in
Docket No. RD14-5-000 relates to the proposed Reliability Standards
MOD-032-1 (Data for Power System Modeling and Analysis) and MOD-033-1
(Steady-State and Dynamics System Model Validation), developed by the
North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), and submitted
to the Commission for approval. NERC's petition related to the proposed
Reliability Standards MOD-032-1 and MOD-033-1 was approved on May 1,
2014, pursuant to the relevant authority delegated to the Director,
Office of Electric Reliability under 18 CFR 375.303.
    Reliability Standard MOD-032-1 consolidates NERC-approved
Reliability Standards MOD-011-0, MOD-013-1 and MOD-014-0, as well as,
Commission approved Reliability Standards MOD-010-0 and MOD-012-0, into
one standard.\1\ Reliability Standard MOD-032-1 requires data
submission by applicable data owners to their respective transmission
planners and planning coordinators to support the interconnection model
building process in their interconnection. Reliability Standard MOD-
033-1 is a new standard that requires each planning coordinator to
implement a documented process to perform model validation within its
planning area. The purpose of the Reliability Standards is to establish
comprehensive modeling data requirements, reporting procedures, and
validation requirements necessary to accurately model the
interconnected transmission system for the near[hyphen]term
transmission planning horizon and the long[hyphen]term transmission
planning horizon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In Order No. 693, the Commission approved Reliability
Standards MOD-010 and MOD-012. Regarding Reliability Standards MOD-
011, MOD-013, MOD-014, and MOD-015, the Commission in Order No. 693
did not approve or remand the standards, pending the receipt of
additional information. Mandatory Reliability Standards for the
Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, 72 FR 16416 (Apr. 4, 2007), at PP
1131-1222, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053
(2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Burden Statement: The number of respondents is based on the NERC
Registry as of April 30, 2014. Public reporting burden for this
proposed collection is estimated as:

                                                                        MOD-032-1
                                                      [Data for power system modeling and analysis]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Number of        Average
             FERC-725A                    Number of       responses  per   burden hours    Total annual                Total annual cost \3\
                                       respondents \2\       respondent    per response    burden hours
                                    (1).................             (2)             (3)     (1)x(2)x(3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Develop data requirements and       PA, TP (200)........               1               8           1,600  $96,000 one-time ($60/hr).
 reporting procedures.
Data Submittal....................  BA, GO, LSE, PA, RP,               1               8          10,840  $650,400 ($60/hr).
                                     TO, TP, TSP (1,355).
Evidence Retention................  BA, GO, LSE, PA, RP,               1               1           1,355  $43,360 ($32/hr).
                                     TO, TP, TSP (1,355).
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................  ....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  $789,760
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                    MOD-033-1
                               [Steady-state and dynamics system model validation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Number of        Average
          FERC-725A                Number of     responses  per   burden hours    Total annual     Total annual
                                respondents \2\     respondent    per response    burden hours       cost \3\
                               (1).............             (2)             (3)     (1)x(2)x(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Develop data validation        PA (75).........               1               8             600  $36,000 one-
 procedures.                                                                                time ($60/hr).
Data Submittal...............  RC, TOP (196)...               1               8           1,568  $94,080 ($60/
                                                                                hr).
Evidence Retention...........  PA, RC, TOP                    1               1             200  $6,400 ($32/
                                (200).                                                            hr).
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ................  ..............  ..............  ..............  $136,480.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: May 7, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ PA = Planning Authority, GO = Generator Owner, TP =
Transmission Planner, BA = Balancing Authority, LSE = Load Serving
Entity, RP = Resource Planner, TSP = Transmission Service Provider,
RC = Reliability Coordinator, TOP = Transmission Operator.
    \3\ The estimates for cost per hour (rounded to the nearest
dollar) are derived as follows:
     $60/hour, the average salary plus benefits per engineer
(from Bureau of Labor Statistics at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm).
     $32/hour, the salary plus benefits per information and
record clerks (from Bureau of Labor Statistics at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2014-11017 Filed 5-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P