Read Instructions 1 0 0 2 1 4 Gather Information / Data 4 0 4 0 0 8 Complete Survey Form 5 0 2 0 0 7 Review Survey Responses 2 0 0 4 1 7 Total Burden ( hrs) 12 0 6 6 2 26 Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 48 Table 6 4 Average Respondent Burden Per Survey Government Respondent Activity Facility Operator Accountant Clerical Support Manager Legal Support Total Burden Per Activity ( Hours)

Read Instructions 1 0 0 2 1 4 Gather Information / Data 4 0 3 0 0 7 Complete Survey Form 1 0 6 0 0 7 Review Survey Responses 0 0 0 4 1 5 Total Burden ( hrs) 6 0 9 6 2 23 Table 6 5 Average Respondent Burden Per Survey Academic/ Research Respondent Activity Facility Operator Accountant Clerical Support Manager Legal Support Total Burden Per Activity ( Hours)

Read Instructions 1 0 0 2 1 4 Gather Information / Data 4 0 3 0 0 7 Complete Survey Form 1 0 6 0 0 7 Review Survey Responses 0 0 0 4 1 5 Total Burden ( hrs) 6 0 9 6 2 23 Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 1The Bureau of Labor Statistics' National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, 1997, Bulletin 2519, September 1999 excludes agriculture from the scope of the survey. The Compensation Survey report the average hourly earnings while the Current Population Survey reports median weekly earnings. The Agency used the same data source for all labor category estimates to avoid inconsistencies caused by a switch between mean and median estimates.

49 6( b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COSTS The Agency obtained 2000 earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Employment and Earnings tables and adjusted them to account for benefits ( see Table 6 6). 1 Table 6 7 summarizes the total hours by labor category and the cost per hour for each category. The average respondent labor cost is estimated to range from $ 21 to $ 762, depending on the survey version, whether a respondent opts to provide copies of financial statements in lieu of completing some questions, or follow up is needed.

Table 6 6 Average Hourly Wage Rate in Manufacturing Industries, United States 2000 Dollars Position Median Weekly Earnings Weekly Earnings Plus Benefits Median Hourly Earnings Bureau of Labor Statistics Current Population Survey Occupation Facility Operator $ 547 $ 711 $ 17.78 Farm Operators and Managers Accountant $ 766 $ 996 $ 24.90 Accountants and Auditors Clerical Support $ 469 $ 610 $ 15.24 Typists Manager $ 965 $ 1,255 $ 31.36 Financial managers Legal Support $ 1,304 $ 1,695 $ 42.38 Lawyers Notes: Wage rates are increased by 30% to account for benefits.

Source: U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Current Population Survey. Table 39. Median Weekly Earnings of Full Time Wage and Salary Workers Detailed by Occupation and Sex. Table 19   Persons at work in agriculture and nonagricultural industries by hours of work   is the source for an assumed 40 hour week. < http:// stats. bls. gov/ pdf/ cpsaat39. pdf> downloaded 12 April 2001. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 50 Table 6 7 Average Respondent Labor Cost Per Survey Parameter Facility Operator Accountant Clerical Support Manager Legal Support Total Burden Cost per labor category $ 17.88 $ 24.90 $ 15.24 $ 31.36 $ 42.38 Total labor burden Screener 0.75 0.25 1 Private/ No forms 10 6 5 6 4 31 Private/ Forms 12 0 6 6 2 26 Government 6 0 9 6 2 23 Academic/ Research 6 0 9 6 2 23 Economic Follow up 0 2 0 0 0 2 Sampling Follow up 2 0 0 1 0 3 Labor Cost per Survey Screener $ 13 $ 0 $ 0 $ 8 $ 0 $ 21 Private/ No forms $ 179 $ 149 $ 76 $ 188 $ 170 $ 762 Private/ Forms $ 215 $ 0 $ 91 $ 188 $ 85 $ 579 Government $ 107 $ 0 $ 137 $ 188 $ 85 $ 517 Academic/ Research $ 107 $ 0 $ 137 $ 188 $ 85 $ 517 Economic Follow up $ 0 $ 50 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 50 Sampling Follow up $ 36 $ 0 $ 0 $ 31 $ 0 $ 67 Because respondents to the data collection surveys will be required to photocopy and mail the completed surveys, the Agency does expect the aquatic animal production industry to incur operating and maintenance costs to respond to the Collection of 2000 Aquatic Animal Production Industry Data. The Agency assumed a photocopying rate of $ 0.10 per page. The copying cost of the screener survey is estimated at $ 0.50 ( assuming four pages in the screener survey and one page that EPA asks to photocopy in case additional space is needed). EPA estimated a mailing rate of $ 0.34 assuming the respondent will return the screener survey via regular mail. The total operation and maintenance costs to respond to the screener per facility will be $ 0.84. With a maximum of 70 pages in the detailed survey and an assumed 5 pages in financial statements and notes, the copying cost is conservatively estimated at $ 7.50 per respondent. To determine the survey mailing rate of $ 7.50 per survey, the Agency assumed that the facility respondents will return the completed survey via Federal Express economy or a comparable economy delivery carrier that requires a signature to acknowledge receipt. The total operation and maintenance costs Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 51 to respond to the detailed survey per facility will be $ 15.00. If economic follow up is needed, the respondent is assumed to copy 30 pages ( 10 for each year of financial tables and notes) for a copying cost of $ 3 and a mailing rate of $ 7.50 for a total cost of $ 10.50 per follow up. If follow up sampling data are collected, the respondent is assumed to copy 20 pages for a copying cost of $ 2.00 and a mailing rate of $ 7.50 for a total cost of $ 9.50 per follow up.

Because EPA will not require survey respondents to purchase any goods, including equipment or machinery, to respond to the Collection of 2000 Aquatic Animal Production Industry Data, the Agency does not expect capital costs to result from the administration of the data collection surveys.

6( c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST Table 6 8 presents an estimate of the burden that EPA will incur to administer the Collection of 2000 Aquatic Animal Production Industry Data. The table identifies the collection administration tasks to be performed by Agency employees and contractors, and the associated hours required for each grouping of related tasks. EPA determined Agency labor costs by multiplying Agency burden figures by the hourly Agency labor rate of $ 53.08. EPA determined this rate by dividing the 2000 GS 13, Step 5 rate for the Washington Baltimore Area of $ 69,008 by a person year of 2,080 hours, and then multiplying the result by a benefits multiplication factor of 1.6. EPA determined contractor labor costs by multiplying contractor burden figures by an average contract labor rate of $ 70. This rate is consistent with current Agency contracts. Table 6 8 also includes estimates of the one time operating and maintenance costs associated with printing, photocopying, and postage. EPA estimated these costs based on experience with similar collections. Total Agency costs ( including contractor and O& M costs) are estimated at $ 463,280. Labor costs for responding to comments, revising survey, and analyzing survey responses contribute to the majority of total costs. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 52 Table 6 8 Agency Burden and Cost for Screener and Detailed Surveys ( including Contractor Cost)

Activities Agency Contractor Burden ( hours) O& M ( Dollars) Total Cost Burden ( hours) O& M ( Dollars) Total Cost $ 53.08/ hr $ 70/ hr Develop the survey instrument; Provide the draft survey instrument to industry trade associations for review; Meet with trade association representatives; Publish notice of anticipated ICR in Federal Register; Respond to all comments received; Revise survey instrument based on reviewers' comments. 300 $ 15,924 200 $ 14,000 Develop a mailing list database; Develop a system to track mailing and receipt activities; Mail survey instruments. 200 $ 10,616 400 $ 28,000 Develop and maintain Help Line and Internet address 150 $ 7,962 400 $ 28,000 Maintain response tracking system; Implement appropriate procedures for handling CBI responses; Review and code responses; Collect missing information. 600 $ 31,848 2,500 $ 175,000 Enter and verify data 300 $ 15,924 1,500 $ 105,000 Economic Followup 50 $ 2,654 100 $ 7,000 Sampling Followup 25 $ 1,327 120 $ 8,400 COLUMN TOTALS BURDEN AND COST 1,625 $ 3,625 $ 86,255 5,220 $ 8,000 $ 365,400 TOTAL BURDEN AND COST $ 463,280 Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 53 6( d) BOTTOM LINE HOURS AND COST TABLE Table 6 9 summarizes the total costs that the aquatic animal production industry and the Agency will incur as a result of the Collection of 2000 Aquatic Animal Production Industry Data. The upper bound estimate with 5000 screener surveys, 700 detailed surveys, 100 economic follow up requests, and 25 follow up sampling information requests is $ 586,268 for the respondent community and $ 463,280 for the Agency.

Table 6 9 Total Estimated Respondent and Agency Burden and Cost Parameter Respondent Cost Agency Cost Screener Private Gov't Academic/ Research Follow up No Forms Forms Econ. Sample Number of Respondents 5000 315 315 59 11 100 25 5,825 Cost per labor per survey $ 21 $ 762 $ 579 $ 517 $ 517 $ 50 $ 67 $ 451,655 Copying and mailing costs per survey ( O& M costs) $ 1 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 $ 10.50 $ 9.50 $ 11,625 Total Cost $ 109,200 $ 244,755 $ 187,110 $ 31,388 $ 5,852 $ 6,050 $ 1,913 $ 463,280 Note: Estimates of the number of respondents to the detailed questionnaire are for respondent burden estimates only. EPA has not yet determined the sampling frame for the detailed questionnaire.

6( e) REASONS FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN Because the Collection of 2000 Aquatic Animal Production Industry Data Information Collection Request is not associated with the renewal or modification of any existing ICR, the burden estimate associated with this survey does not represent a change in any existing ICR burden estimate. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 54 Form Approved OMB Control No.  Approval Expires / /

The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this survey is estimated to average 31 hours. Burden means total time, effort, or financial resources expended by the persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. 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 Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) control number. Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Office of Policy, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Regulatory Information Division, MC 2137, 401 M Street, S. W., Washington, DC 20460. Include OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed survey to this address. 6( f) BURDEN STATEMENT The following statement will be included in the questionnaire: Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 55 PART B 1. SURVEY OBJECTIVES, KEY VARIABLES, AND OTHER PRELIMINARIES 1( a) SURVEY OBJECTIVES The aquatic animal production survey will provide information essential to establishing a need for and developing regulations under Section 304( m) of the Clean Water Act. Survey data are essential for characterizing the nationwide and industry specific status of aquatic animal production facility locations, the types of operations, wastewater characteristics, wastewater management technology, and for assessing the financial status of aquatic animal production facilities potentially affected by proposed regulations.

1( b) KEY VARIABLES Please refer to Part A, Section 4( b), of this ICR for information on this topic .

1( c) STATISTICAL APPROACH The objectives of the survey information collection can be achieved by a screener census and a detailed sample survey at considerably lower cost and burden ( to EPA and respondents) than will be required for a detailed census. In response to comments, EPA has determined that a screener census is required to ensure that the detailed sample survey is sent to the types of facilities necessary to evaluate potential regulatory subcategories. A statistically designed sample survey is necessary to ensure that the resulting inferences and analyses are as statistically unbiased and as precise as is practicable. The cost and time burden on both industry and EPA is reduced by collecting detailed information through a sample survey, as opposed to sending the detailed questionnaire to all facilities in the aquatic animal production industry.

This survey has been designed and will be implemented with the assistance of four contractors. Tetra Tech, Inc, 10309 Eaton Place, Suite 340, Fairfax, VA 22030 will provide engineering support under EPA Contract No. 68 C 99 263, which is monitored by the Energy Branch, Engineering and Analysis Division of EPA's Office of Science and Technology. Eastern Research Group, Inc. ( ERG), 110 Hartwell Avenue, Lexington, MA 02421 3136 will provide economic and financial support under EPA Contract No. 68 C6 0022, which is monitored by the Economics and Statistics Branch, Engineering and Analysis Division of EPA's Office of Science and Technology. Westat, at 1650 Research Blvd, Rockville, MD 20850 will provide statistical support under EPA Contract No. 68 C 99 242, which is monitored by the Economics and Statistical Analysis Branch, Engineering and Analysis Division, Office of Science and Technology of EPA's Office of Water. Science Applications International Corporation ( SAIC), at 11251 Roger Bacon, Reston, VA 22090 will also provide statistical support under EPA Contract No. 68 C 99 233, which is monitored by the Economic And Statistical Analysis Branch, Engineering and Analysis Division, Office of Science and Technology of EPA's Office of Water. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 56 1( d) FEASIBILITY The survey will be conducted under the authority of Section 308 of the Clean Water Act ( 33 U. S. C. 1318). Surveys will be mailed to aquatic animal production facilities. Toll free telephone help lines will be provided by contractors. Respondents are provided information regarding these help lines in the General Information and Instructions sections of the screener and detailed surveys.

The collection schedule ( see Section 5( d) in Part A of this ICR) accounts for the events and response times leading up to final analysis of survey data. This project will involve the design of analyses, computer programs, and report formats in advance of data entry of survey responses. This approach will ensure that key results are reported promptly once data entry and data quality checks are finished. Completion of these tasks will require planning and coordination among the contractors for statistical, technical, and financial analyses.

2. SURVEY DESIGN This information collection request covers two separate but related questionnaire instruments. The first is a screener questionnaire and the second is a detailed questionnaire. The procedures for collecting information associated with each instrument are detailed below.

2( a) TARGET POPULATION To obtain valuable information on the aquatic animal production industry's wastewater management practices, EPA has targeted aquatic animal production facilities with pond, flow through, recirculating system, net pens and cages, floating aquaculture and bottom culture, and other aquaculture operations. The species include those listed in Appendix A of the detailed survey. The target population also includes private/ commercial, government, and academic/ research institutions.

2( b) SAMPLING DESIGN The sampling design will combine a screener census with a detailed survey that uses a stratified probability sample. Strata for the detailed survey will be developed using information from EPA's screener census.

( i) Sampling Frame The sampling frame for EPA's screener census was developed by synthesizing facility information found in the Dunn and Bradstreet database, EPA's Permit Compliance System, contacts with EPA regional permit writers, EPA site visits, State aquaculture contacts, assistance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs on tribal facilities, universities, and recent issues of Aquaculture Magazine. Additionally, EPA requested but was denied access to the facility identification data associated with the U. S. Department of Agriculture's 1998 Census of Aquaculture. EPA believes that the sampling frame is current, reasonably complete, and considerable effort has been expended to reduce duplication. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 57 While the summary statistics available from the Census of Aquaculture are not sufficient to provide regulatory analyses at the facility level, EPA's sampling frame can be compared to summary statistics from the Census of Aquaculture as a way to evaluate EPA's efforts to develop the sampling frame. In particular, the 1998 Census of Aquaculture contained response from just over 4,000 facilities while EPA's current sampling frame contains over 5,000 facilities expected to practice aquaculture.

Since approximately 90% of the facilities identified in EPA's sampling frame are not classified by species of aquatic animal in production, the available database is not considered to be sufficient for purposes of selecting recipients for the detailed questionnaire. The primary purpose of the screener census is to collect this information.

( ii) Sample Sizes and Their Allocation Approximately 5,000 facilities will receive the screener census and approximately 500 to 700 facilities will receive the detailed questionnaire. Results of the screener census will be used to ensure that a high percentage of facilities receiving the detailed questionnaire are in the aquatic animal production industry and that they are conducting operations of interest to EPA.

( iii) Stratification Variables Strata will be based on type of facility ( commercial, academic, or governmental), the species produced, and the methods of production. Stratification increases precision ( removing the variability due to differences explained by species or production methods) for estimates of costs, benefits and other quantities. The thirteen ( 13) categories of species produced will include: catfish, trout, salmon, striped bass, tilapia, other fin fish, bait fish, ornamentals, shrimp, crawfish, other crustaceans, molluscan shellfish, and other. Other fin fish include other food fish, sport/ game fish, etc. Bait fish include fathead minnows, golden shiners, feeder goldfish, etc. Ornamentals include koi, ornamental goldfish, and tropical fish. Other crustaceans include lobster pounds, softshell crabs, etc. Other includes anything that does not fit in the above categories, such as alligators, turtles, frogs, etc. The six ( 6) categories of production methods will include: ponds, flow through, recirculating systems, net pens and cages, floating aquaculture and bottom culture, and other.

( iv) Sampling Methods The screener questionnaire will be sent to a census of identified facilities ( approximately 5,000) and the detailed survey will be sent to a probability sample of between 500 to 700 facilities, with stratification as described above. The entities selected to receive the detailed questionnaire ( the sampling unit) will be facilities. Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 58 2( c) SAMPLE SIZE AND PRECISION ( i) Precision Targets Screener Questionnaire The sampling design for the screener survey is a census. In other words, all known aquatic animal production facilities will be required to respond to this survey. Counts of results from this survey will be used to describe the number of facilities: that produce specific species, with specific methods of production, and that use various wastewater treatment and management practices. Since a high degree of accuracy is required in answering these specific questions, the variability associated with sampling fewer than all known facilities is not acceptable. Species and production information will be used to target specific types of facilities in the detailed questionnaire. In response to comments, the census of wastewater treatment and management practices will be used to more accurately describe the potential regulatory options associated with any proposed or final regulation of this industry. While the screener survey will not provide enough detail to cost incremental wastewater management practices or to perform an economic analysis of the impacts of those costs, the screener provides a sampling frame for the detailed questionnaire as well as the ability to extrapolate from detailed questionnaire data to national estimates.

Detailed Questionnaire Respondents to the detailed questionnaire will be selected at random from within groups ( stratified random selection) that are identified using results of the screener census. Between 500 and 700 facilities are expected to receive the detailed questionnaire, though the exact number receiving the detailed questionnaire will depend on combining results from the screener census and design principles that will be presented in this section.

Groups ( strata) will be created based on facility type, species produced, and methods of production. Stratification increases precision ( removing the variability due to differences explained by facility type, species, or production methods) for estimates of costs, benefits and other quantities. The anticipated precision associated with estimates generated from the detailed questionnaire can not be calculated prior to receiving results from the screener questionnaire. However, EPA's design goals for the detailed questionnaire can be described as follows:

EPA's primary design goals are stated in terms of yes or no questions ( binomial responses). Examples of EPA questions that can be characterized this way include:

# What fraction of facilities will be able to meet proposed limits without additional costs?

# What fraction of facilities will be able to meet proposed limits after incurring additional costs?

# What fraction of facilities will close due to costs associated with regulation?

For estimates across the entire industry, EPA intends to design the sampling plan for the detailed survey such that 95% of these estimated fractions will be well within plus or minus 0.05 under conditions leading Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 59 to maximum variability. Maximum variability occurs when the true national fraction of facilities answering " yes" is equal to 0.5. For groups defined by combinations of facility type, species, and production methods, EPA intends to design such that 95% of these estimated fractions are within plus or minus 0.30. Given three ( 3) classes of facilities, thirteen ( 13) categories of species and six ( 6) categories of production methods, there could be as many as two hundred and thirty four ( 234) of these groups. However, EPA does not expect a number of these survey design groups to have any associated facilities in the census.

An additional design goal is to not allow any small group of facilities to overly influence the national estimates. An individual facility's influence on national estimates is inversely related to the percentage of facilities sampled within a survey design group. Simplifying some, when one facility in ten is sampled, then the sampled facility will be used to represent ten facilities in national estimates. If another group in the same survey is sampled at a rate of one in ten thousand, any facility in this group will influence national estimates approximately a thousand times more than those in the first group. Since each survey design group is expected to be of a different size, it is not possible to give all of the sampled facilities exactly the same influence. However, one of EPA's design goals is to minimize the difference in influence.

( ii) Nonsampling Errors Nonresponse is relatively low for surveys sent under the authority of Section 308 of the Clean Water Act. EPA will employ several measures to reduce nonresponses. The cover letter and instructions for the surveys will explain the legal authority, responsibility to respond, reasons for the survey, and penalty for nonresponse. Delivery or nondelivery of the surveys will be tracked using Federal Express, thus a signature of recipient will be required. A help line will be operated while the surveys are in the field so that technical, financial, and administrative questions regarding the survey can be addressed. Recipients not responding to the Screener and/ or Detailed Survey by the deadline date may be telephoned to encourage response, to answer questions, and to determine the reasons for the nonresponse.

Inaccurate or incomplete responses can occur due to misunderstandings or the misinterpretation of questions and the unintentional skipping of questions by respondents. Errors can occur when responses are coded, edited and entered into the database. The design and implementation of the Detailed Surveys will employ a number of quality assurance techniques to reduce the frequency of such errors. These techniques include the following:

Review of questions for ambiguity and clarity

Use of an easily followed sequence of questions and stopping points

Provision of a limited number of carefully considered responses to each question

Provision of clear definitions of units of measurement and of technical terms

Provision of clear instructions with references to the definitions Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 60

Provision of a " help line" with a toll free number to assist respondents

Review of questions by engineers, scientists, and economists who will telephone respondents to obtain missing information and resolve problems and inconsistencies

Use of double entry keypunch verification on all surveys

Conduct of computerized comparison of selected responses to detect inconsistencies and illogical responses

Conduct of computerized analyses to screen for out of range and inconsistent numerical values

Conduct of computerized analyses to detect missing numerical data and missing units

For the screener survey, use of a small number of questions 2( d) SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN Please refer to Part A, Section 4( b) of this ICR for information on this topic.

3. PRETESTS AND PILOT TESTS Please refer to Part A, Section 5( b) of this ICR for information on this topic.

4. COLLECTION METHODS AND FOLLOW UP 4( a) COLLECTION METHODS Please refer to Section 5( b), Part A of this ICR for information on this topic.

4( b) SURVEY RESPONSE AND FOLLOW UP Please refer to Section 5( b), Part A of this ICR for information on this topic 5. ANALYZING AND REPORTING SURVEY RESULTS 5( a) DATA PREPARATION Aquatic Animal Production Industry ICR DRAFT 19 April 2001 61 EPA will prepare the aquatic animal production survey data in a manner consistent with other survey efforts at the Agency ( e. g., past effluent guidelines surveys). Upon receipt of the completed surveys, the data will be entered and reviewed for coding consistency, missing data, and obvious inconsistencies in reported data by engineering and economic staff. Any inconsistencies will be resolved through call backs and any changes made will be documented. Contractor resources will be used for this effort as well as for data entry. Once the data is entered into a database, numerous manual and electronic QA activities will be performed and the results will be provided to engineering and economic staff for further resolution and documentation.

5( b) ANALYSIS Analyses of the surveys will have the objectives of ( a) producing narrative and quantitative characterizations of the aquatic animal production industry, aquatic animal production operations, process wastewater and treatment technologies, ( b) characterizing plant specific and site specific factors that distinguish potential for adverse environmental impact, ( c) characterizing plant specific and site specific factors that distinguish technology options and costs for reducing adverse environmental impact, ( d) estimating costs of regulatory options and impacts, ( e) estimating benefits of regulatory options.

5( c) REPORTING RESULTS All responses containing or consisting of CBI will be so identified in the survey database. Regulations governing confidentiality of business information appear at 40 CFR Part 2 Subpart B, and these are adhered to strictly by EPA and its contractors. Safeguards and procedures for CBI are described in written plans maintained by EPA and its contractors.

Information not classified as CBI could potentially be shared with any interested parties, unless releasing such information in conjunction with publicly available summary statistics will divulge CBI from one or more facilities. Such information is subject to Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA) requests. Results of EPA's analyses become publicly available most often in three ways: ( 1) within proposed and final rules published in the Federal Register, ( 2) within development and supporting documents otherwise published in support of rulemaking, and ( 3) within materials placed in the rulemaking docket. The first two classes of documents are being made available by EPA on the Internet with increasing frequency; and this mode of reporting is a possibility for the results of the surveys described in this ICR.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 34 (Wednesday, February 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11748-11751]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03761]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1102; EPA-R05-OAR-2008-0782; FRL-9771-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; PBR and PTIO

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: As additions to Ohio's State Implementation Plan (SIP) under
the Clean Air Act, EPA is approving six Permit-by-Rule (PBR)
provisions, a Permit to Install and Operate (PTIO) program, two
permanent exemptions from the Permit to Install (PTI) requirement, and
a General Permit program. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) requested these rule revisions to make its air pollution permit
program more efficient. Approving these additions will make the PBRs,
PTIOs, and general permits Federally enforceable. Because these rule
revisions will make Ohio's air permit program more efficient while
continuing to protect human health and the environment, EPA approves
the revisions.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA R05 OAR 2007-1102; EPA-R05-OAR-2008-0782. All documents in the
docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Kaushal Gupta, Environmental Engineer,
at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kaushal Gupta, Environmental Engineer,
Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What does this document address?
II. What program changes is EPA approving?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What does this document address?

    This document addresses requests from Ohio to incorporate the
following rules into the Ohio SIP.

1. PBR and Permanent Exemption Provisions

    Ohio's Federally approved construction program, Ohio Administrative
Code (OAC) 3745-31 (``Permits to Install New Sources of Pollution'')
provides the authority for OEPA to issue PTIs to new sources of air
pollution or modifications to existing sources of air pollution. For
attainment areas, the program was conditionally approved into Ohio's
SIP on October 10, 2001 (66 FR 51570) and fully approved on January 22,
2003 (68 FR 2909). For nonattainment areas, the program was fully
approved on January 10, 2003 (68 FR 1366). Included in this program at
OAC 3745-31-03 (``Permit to install exemptions'') are exemptions from
the requirement to obtain a PTI before constructing or modifying a
source of air pollution. The types of exemptions include permanent
exemptions, Federal-based exemptions, discretionary exemptions, and PBR
exemptions (exempting certain sources from the PTI requirement as long
as they comply with the relevant provisions of the PBR rule).
    On April 24, 2006, EPA received a request from OEPA to approve the
addition of two permanent exemptions and six PBR provisions to the SIP.

2. PTIO and General Permit Programs

    Prior to the rulemaking, a minor source (that is, a source not
subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act) in Ohio would be issued both a
PTI under OAC 3745-31 and a Permit to Operate (PTO) under OAC 3745-35
(``Air Permits to Operate and Variances''). Ohio is now combining both
permit programs into a new PTIO program. Under the PTIO program, a
minor source would be issued one PTIO instead of a PTI and a PTO.
    On June 30, 2008, the state regulations to implement the PTIO
program became effective and OAC 3745-35 was rescinded. On July 18,
2008, OEPA submitted to EPA a request to approve the addition of the
PTIO program and a General Permit program to the SIP. The changes to
Ohio's SIP involve the modification of various parts of OAC 3745-31,
the removal of OAC 3745-35, and the addition of OAC 3745-31-29 to
enable the issuance of Federally enforceable general PTIs and general
PTIOs.
    On October 1, 2012, EPA approved the aforementioned PBR, permanent
exemption, PTIO, and General Permit program provisions (77 FR 59751) as
a revision to Ohio's SIP. However, the provisions included the
following terms which EPA had not intended to act on:
     The SIP revision classified municipal incinerators capable
of charging more than 250 tons of refuse per day as having a major
stationary source emission threshold of 100 tons per year or more. OAC
3745-31-01(LLL)(2)(a)(ix).
     The SIP revision allowed OEPA Director's discretion for
complying with the public participation notification requirements for
Federal Land Managers. OAC 3745-31-06(H)(2)(d).
     The SIP revision allowed Director's discretion and
specific exemptions with regard to preconstruction activities. OAC
3745-31-33.

EPA withdrew its approval on November 23, 2012 (77 FR 70121). This
document approves the PBR, permanent exemption, PTIO, and General
Permit

program provisions without taking action on the above language. It is a
final action based on the proposed approval published on October 1,
2012 (77 FR 59879).

II. What program changes is EPA approving?

1. PBR and Permanent Exemption Provisions

    EPA is approving the requested modifications and additions to the
permanent exemption and PBR provisions in OAC 3745-31-03. The
significant changes are as follows.
    The permanent exemption from the requirement to obtain a PTI for
organic liquid storage tanks is being expanded to cover larger tanks.
Currently, the exemption only applies to tanks with a capacity less
than 10,000-gallons; the modification would exempt tanks of less than
19,815-gallon capacity (except for gasoline storage tanks at bulk
gasoline plants), tanks between 19,815 and 39,894-gallon capacity with
maximum true vapor pressure less than 2.176 pounds per square inch
absolute (psia), and tanks of 39,894-gallon or greater capacity with
maximum true vapor pressure less than 0.508 psia. Note that permanent
exemptions under this rule do not exempt any source from the
requirements of the Clean Air Act, including but not limited to, being
considered for purposes of determining whether a facility constitutes a
major source or being included in a Title V permit application.
    PBR exemptions from the requirement to apply for individual PTIs
are being added for auto body refinishing facilities, gasoline
dispensing facilities with Stage I controls, gasoline dispensing
facilities with Stage I and Stage II controls, boilers and heaters,
small printing facilities, and mid-size printing facilities that meet
certain size, throughput, and process requirements. Each PBR exemption
has requirements for emission limitation and/or control, monitoring
and/or recordkeeping, reporting, and testing. Furthermore, the PBR
exemptions rule now includes general provisions for recordkeeping,
record retention, notification, and reporting requirements that apply
to all sources utilizing the PBR exemptions. The general provisions
clarify that the PBR exemptions do not exempt any source from the
requirements of the Clean Air Act, including but not limited to, being
considered for purposes of determining whether a facility constitutes a
major source or being included in a Title V permit application.
    In a December 1, 2008, letter, Ohio provided technical support for
the PBR and PTIO provisions to demonstrate that the provisions are
protective of the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of
significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress
demonstrations and visibility, and are not in violation of section 193
of the Clean Air Act, the ``General Savings Clause.''
    In a February 14, 2012, letter, Ohio provided a survey of the
estimated emissions from the state's organic liquid storage tanks to
demonstrate that the modified permanent exemption for organic liquid
storage tanks would have no negative impact on air quality. In a May
24, 2012, email, Ohio clarified that in the context of this exemption,
an ``organic liquid'' is an organic compound at the temperature and
pressure experienced inside the storage tank, and that the organic
liquid would have to remain a liquid to qualify for the exemption. The
email further clarified that the ``submerged fill'' mentioned in this
rule is the same as a ``submerged fill pipe'' as defined in OAC 3745-
21-01(C)(6).

2. PTIO and General Permit Programs

    OAC Chapter 3745-35, which contained the rules for PTOs and
Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits, is being rescinded in
its entirety from the SIP. OAC 3745-31-29 (``General permits-to-install
and general PTIO'') is being added to the SIP to make Ohio's general
PTIs and general PTIOs Federally enforceable. General PTIs and general
PTIOs are based on model permits issued by OEPA. Sources may apply for
coverage under a model permit rather than apply for individual permits.
Only minor sources may qualify for coverage under a general permit.
    We are not taking action on OAC 3745-31-33 (``Site preparation
activities prior to obtaining a final permit-to-install or PTIO''),
which allows Director's discretion and specific exemptions with regard
to preconstruction activities. This rule will not be part of the SIP.
    Other, previously approved parts of Ohio's SIP are being modified
as follows:
    a. OAC 3745-15-03 (``Submission of emission information''), is
being modified to replace all instances of ``Board Director'' to
``Director.''
    b. OAC 3745-31-01 (``Definitions''), which provides definitions for
the permit program, is being expanded to include definitions for
``permits to install and operate,'' ``PTIOs,'' and ``express permit
processing.'' The SIP revision submittal includes changes to the
definitions of ``Air contaminant source'' and ``Major stationary
source'' but, per OEPA's request in its July 18, 2008, submittal, we
are not approving these two changes at this time. Furthermore, we are
not taking action on 3745-31-01(LLL)(2)(a)(ix) which classifies
municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of refuse
per day as having a major stationary source emission threshold of 100
tons per year or more. This provision will not be part of the SIP.
    c. OAC 3745-31-02 (``Requirements'') now requires sources to obtain
PTIs or PTIOs before installation or modification, whether or not such
sources are subject to Title V of the Clean Air Act (administered in
Ohio under OAC 3745-77). Existing PTIs and PTOs remain effective until
superseded by PTIOs. Note that this rule no longer contains the
previously approved rule's provisions applying to solid waste disposal
facilities and land application of sludge.
    d. OAC 3745-31-04 (``Applications'') is being expanded to require
PTIO applications.
    e. OAC 3745-31-05 (``Criteria for decision by the director'') is
being expanded to require PTIOs to contain the Best Available
Technology (BAT), which is a previously SIP-approved requirement.
Certain terms from the rescinded OAC 3745-35, such as conditional
permits, are being incorporated into the new PTIO rules. Per Ohio's
request in its July 18, 2008, submittal, we are not taking action on
the provision that exempts sources with the potential to emit less than
10 tons per year from the BAT requirement. This provision will not be
part of the SIP.
    f. OAC 3745-31-06 (``Termination'') is being rescinded in its
entirety and replaced by a new OAC 3745-31-06 (``Completeness
determination, processing requirements, public participation, public
notice, and issuance''). We are not approving OAC 3745-31-06(H)(2)(d)
which allows Director's discretion for complying with the public
participation notification requirements for Federal Land Managers.
    g. OAC 3745-31-07 (``Revocation'') is being expanded to cover
termination, expiration, renewal, revision, and transfer.
    h. OAC 3745-31-08 (``Procedure for decision by director'') is being
rescinded in its entirety and replaced by a new OAC 3745-31-08
(``Registration status permit-to-operate'') that provides the ongoing
requirements for non-Title V sources that received registration status
under the rescinded OAC 3745-35.

    i. OAC 3745-31-09 (``Air permit-to-install completeness
determinations, public participation, and public notice'') is being
rescinded in its entirety and replaced by a new OAC 3745-31-09
(``Variances on operation'') that has the provisions for variances that
were in the rescinded 3745-35.
    j. OAC 3745-31-10 (``Air stationary source obligations'') is
undergoing relocation of certain terms to other parts of the SIP.
    k. OAC 3745-31-20 is undergoing minor revisions to update rule
citations.
    l. OAC 3745-31-22 is undergoing removal of two references to
pollution control projects, a component of Federally required New
Source Review (NSR) Reform regulations that was vacated from the
Federal NSR program.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the modification of OAC 3745-31-03 to incorporate
PBRs for auto body refinishing facilities, gasoline dispensing
facilities with Stage I controls, gasoline dispensing facilities with
Stage I and Stage II controls, boilers and heaters, small printing
facilities, and mid-size printing facilities. EPA is approving the
modification of OAC 3745-31-03 to incorporate permanent exemptions for
organic liquid storage tanks of less than 19,815-gallon capacity,
between 19,815 and 39,894-gallon capacity, and tanks of 39,894-gallon
or greater capacity. EPA is approving the rescission of OAC 3745-35 and
the modification of OAC 3745-15-03, 3745-31-01, 3745-31-02, 3745-31-04,
3745-31-05, 3745-31-06, 3745-31-07, 3745-31-08, 3745-31-09, 3745-31-10,
3745-31-20, and 3745-31-22 to accommodate Ohio's PTIO program,
reorganize other provisions, and remove vacated NSR Reform provisions.
EPA is approving OAC 3745-31-29, the program for General PTIs and
General PTIOs, as an addition to the SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 22, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: December 28, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart KK--Ohio

0
2. Section 52.1870 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(42), (c)(51),
(c)(98)(i), and (c)(119)(i)(A), and by adding paragraph (c)(156) to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.1870  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (42) On February 25, 1980, the State of Ohio submitted the revised
Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) Rules 3745-35-01 through 3745-35-04
which set forth requirements for air permits to operate and variances.
These rules were adopted on September 28, 1979 and became effective in
Ohio on November 7, 1979. Rescinded in 2008; see paragraph (c)(156) of
this section.
* * * * *
    (51) On October 1, 1982, and February 28, 1983 the State of Ohio
submitted revisions to Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) Rules 3745-35-03
which set forth requirements for obtaining

variances. Rescinded in 2008; see paragraph (c)(156) of this section.
* * * * *
    (98) * * *
    (i) Incorporation by reference. Rule 3745-35-07, adopted November
3, 1994, effective November 18, 1994. Rescinded in 2008; see paragraph
(c)(156) of this section.
* * * * *
    (119) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Ohio Administrative Code 3745-35-02, adopted April 4, 1994,
effective April 20, 1994. Rescinded in 2008; see paragraph (c)(156) of
this section.
* * * * *
    (156) On April 24, 2006, Ohio EPA submitted two permanent
exemptions from the Permit to Install program and six Permit-by-Rule
provisions for approval into its SIP. On July 18, 2008, Ohio EPA
submitted provisions for a Permit to Install and Operate (PTIO) program
and a general permit program for approval into its SIP. The changes to
Ohio's SIP involve the modification of various parts of OAC 3745-31,
the removal of OAC 3745-35, and the addition of OAC 3745-31-29 to
enable the issuance of federally enforceable general PTIs and general
PTIOs. On June 30, 2008, the state regulations to implement the PTIO
program became effective and OAC 3745-35 was rescinded.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Paragraph (A) of Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-15-03,
``Submission of emission information.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (B) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-01, ``Definitions.'',
effective December 14, 2007, except for paragraphs (I),
(LLL)(2)(a)(ix), (LLL)(2)(a)(xxi), (LLL)(4)(t), and (QQQ)(1)(b).
    (C) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-02, ``Applicability,
requirements, and obligations.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (D) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-03, ``Exemptions.'',
effective June 30, 2008.
    (E) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-04, ``Applications.'',
effective June 30, 2008.
    (F) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-05, ``Criteria for
decision by the director.'', effective June 30, 2008, except for
paragraph (A)(3)(a)(ii).
    (G) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-06, ``Completeness
determinations, processing requirements, public participation, public
notice, and issuance.'', effective June 30, 2008, except for paragraph
(H)(2)(d).
    (H) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-07, ``Termination,
revocation, expiration, renewal, revision and transfer.'', effective
June 30, 2008.
    (I) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-08, ``Registration status
permit-to-operate.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (J) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-09, ``Variances on
operation.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (K) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-10, ``NSR projects at
existing emissions units at a major stationary source.'', effective
June 30, 2008.
    (L) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-20, ``Attainment
provisions--innovative control technology.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (M) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-22, ``Nonattainment
provisions--conditions for approval.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (N) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-29, ``General permit-to-
install and general PTIO.'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (O) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 3745-31-32, ``Plantwide
applicability limit (PAL).'', effective June 30, 2008.
    (P) June 2, 2008, ``Director's Final Findings and Orders'', signed
by Chris Korleski, Director, Ohio EPA.

[FR Doc. 2013-03761 Filed 2-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 71721]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25159]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-11-000.
    Applicants: Guardian Pipeline, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Update Non-Conforming and
Negotiated Rate Agreements--November 2016 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-12-000.
    Applicants: Questar Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Company Name Change to be
effective 10/11/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5237.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-13-000.
    Applicants: Questar Overthrust Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Change of Company Name to be
effective 10/11/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5239.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-14-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Cargill Inorporated (RTS) 3085-28 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5265.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-15-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Direct Energy Business Marketing, LLC (RTS) 7465-06 to be effective 11/
1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5269.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-16-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Emera Energy Services Inc. (RTS) 2715-31 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5282.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-17-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Emera Energy Services Inc. (RTS) 2715-33 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5288.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-18-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Mercuria Energy America, Inc. (RTS) 7540-09 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5291.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-19-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 10/11/16 Negotiated Rates--
Vitol Inc. (RTS) 7495-02 to be effective 11/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 10/11/16.
    Accession Number: 20161011-5292.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/16.

    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: October 12, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-25159 Filed 10-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P