[Federal Register: October 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 194)]
[Notices]
[Page 59098]
[DOCID:fr06oc06-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-610-000]

Alliance Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas
Tariff

September 29, 2006.
    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Alliance Pipeline L.P.
(Alliance) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original
Volume No. 1, Fourth Revised Sheet No. 10, with an effective date of
October 1, 2006.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16537 Filed 10-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


PRODUCTS

FUEL FILLS & VENTS .................................................

Proactive boat builders are using this the EPA emission requirement as an opportunity for  to focus on boater customer satisfaction. To that end, ECS and it's suppliers have and are developing refueling product technologies (both composite and metallic) that reduce dramatically and minimize spit back and accidental overflow events.

FUEL HOSE & DELIVERY ACCESSORIES.......................

In addition to EPA low permeation requirements, we must now also be aware of the aggressive nature of high ethanol fuel blends (E10/20 and up) that are much more aggressive than gasoline's of the past. ECS has selected the highest quality hoses & filtration accessories available to offer for installations. (Fuel fill, vent and delivery hose available in all sizes, bulk boxed or pre-cut into kits.)

FUEL TANKS    .........................................................

ECS can provide a fuel tank solution custom to each boat requirement. We are experts in the design of boat fuel tanks, but unlike existing fuel tank producers, ECS is not tied to a single manufacturing process. We select the appropriate molding or fabricating process and specific material for each vessel application. We then assemble the tank with specified fittings, test, QC and certify the tanks "in house" prior to release to industry.

CARBON CANISTERS.............................................................

A new feature for boats, marine evaporative carbon canisters are designed to minimize/reduce the flow of fuel vapor (hydrocarbons) into the atmosphere. As the daily diurnal temperature swings up (during the heat of the day), fuel in the boats tank evaporates and is captured and stored in an appropriately sized canister that contains activated water resistant charcoal. As the diurnal temperature swings down (during the evening), clean cool air passes back though the canister and carries the stored hydrocarbons back into the fuel tank. This creates what is referred to as passive purge.

For a complete update on marine emission control technology solutions, please see contact information at the   HYPERLINK "http://www.engineeredcompositesolutions.com/Original%20Equipment.htm"  Original Equipment  page of this website.

	Top of Form

Bottom of Form

http://www.engineeredcompositesolutions.com/Products.htm

downloaded April 24, 2008


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 103 (Friday, May 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 30630]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13052]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 56

Piping Systems and Appurtenances

CFR Correction

0
In Title 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 41 to 69, revised
as of October 1, 2014, on page 229, in Sec.  56.70-15, the heading for
paragraph (b) is reinstated before paragraph (1) to read: ``(b) Girth
butt welds.''

[FR Doc. 2015-13052 Filed 5-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22840-22841]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-1999-6135]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards from New Jersey Transit (NJT). NJT
seeks a modification to the original terms and conditions of its waiver
of compliance that was granted in 1999. As part of NJT's construction
of a future Pennsauken transfer station (allowing transfers between
Atlantic City commuter trains and the River Line), NJT is lengthening
the Pennsauken siding at Control Point (CP) 55 to now include Minson
siding; incorporating trackwork improvements and changes to the signal
and train control (S&TC) system. NJT submits that this request is
consistent with the waiver process for shared use. (See Statement of
Agency Policy Concerning Jurisdiction Over the Safety of Railroad
Passenger Operations and Waivers Related to Shared Use of the Tracks of
the General Railroad System by Light Rail and Conventional Equipment,
65 FR 42529 (July 10, 2000); see also Joint Statement of Agency Policy
Concerning Shared Use of the Tracks of the General Railroad System by
Conventional Railroads and Light Rail Transit Systems, 65 FR 42626
(July 10, 2000).)
    Specifically, in April 2007, FRA approved NJT's S&TC improvements
between CP45 and CP70 (which includes CP Ross, Minson siding, and
Pennsauken siding) along its River Line

rail fixed guideway light-rail transit system. NJT calls this `scripted
temporal separation,' which maintains the required temporal separation,
but provides for superior use of the existing infrastructure by
expanding the passenger period, and allowing Conrail some increased
flexibility in and out of the Minson siding to Pavonia Yard. The
addition of a future Pennsauken transfer station on the single track
south of CP Ross at Milepost 4.9 will add time to trains operating
northbound and southbound that meet at CP Ross, thus resulting in
significant headway degradation. NJT claims that by lengthening
Pennsauken siding to include Minson siding, headway degradation will be
mitigated. This petition serves to notify FRA of NJT's plan to modify
the trackwork, S&TC, and operational plans as part of this Pennsauken
siding lengthening and Pennsauken transfer station construction.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
1999-6135) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by June 1, 2012 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable. All written communications concerning
these proceedings are available for examination during regular business
hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above facility. All documents in the
public docket are also available for inspection and copying on the
Internet at the docket facility's Web site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the U.S. Department of Transportation's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000
(Volume 65, Number 70; Page 19477), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 11, 2012.
Ron Hynes,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-9127 Filed 4-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74226-74227]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0125; Notice 1]

Hankook Tire America Corp, Receipt of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Hankook Tire America Corp, (Hankook) has determined that
certain model year Hankook Roadhandler Sport (H432) tires manufactured
between June 21, 2013 and August 29, 2013, do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.5(f) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Hankook has filed
an appropriate report dated October 4, 2013, pursuant to 49 CFR part
573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is January 9,
2014.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited at the beginning of this notice and be
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Deliver: Deliver comments by hand to: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. The
Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. except
Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by: Logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web site at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that your comments were received, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Documents submitted to a docket may be viewed by anyone at the
address and times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by following the online
instructions for accessing the dockets. DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement is available for review in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477-78).
    The petition, supporting materials, and all comments received
before the close of business on the closing date indicated below will
be filed and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the extent possible. When the petition is granted or
denied, notice of the decision will be published in the Federal
Register pursuant to the authority indicated below.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Hankook's Petition: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)
(see implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556), Hankook submitted a
petition for an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements
of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    This notice of receipt of Hankook's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.
    II. Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 6,257 Roadhandler
Sport (H432), size 215/45R17 91W XL, Hankook tires manufactured between
June 21, 2013 and August 29, 2013.
    III. Noncompliance: Hankook explains that the noncompliance is
that, due to a mold labeling error, the sidewall marking on the side of
the tires incorrectly describes the actual number of plies in the tread
area of the tires as required by paragraph S5.5(f) of 49 CFR 571.139.
Specifically, the tires in question were inadvertently manufactured
with ``Ply Tread 2 steel + 1 Polyester + 2 Nylon, Sidewall 1
Polyester.'' The correct labeling and stamping to match the tire
construction should have been ``Ply Tread 2 steel + 1 Polyester + 1
Nylon, Sidewall 1 Polyester.''
    IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5(f) of FMVSS No. 139 requires in
pertinent part:

    S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as specified in paragraphs (a)
through (i) of S5.5, each tire must be marked on each sidewall with
the information specified in S5.5(a) through (d) and on one side-
wall with the information specified in S5.5(e) through (i) according
to the phase-in schedule specified in S7 of this standard. The
markings must be placed between the maximum section width and the
bead on at least one sidewall, unless the maximum section width of
the tire is located in an area that is not more than one-fourth of
the distance from the bead to the shoulder of the tire. If the
maximum section width that falls within that area, those markings
must appear between the bead and a point one-half the distance from
the bead to the shoulder of the tire, on at least one sidewall. The
markings must be in letters and numerals not less than 0.078 inches
high and raised above or sunk below the tire surface not less than
0.015 inches . . .
    (f) The actual number of plies in the sidewall, and the actual
number of plies in the tread area, if different.

    V. Summary of Hankook's Analyses: Hankook stated its belief that
the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety
for the following reasons:
    1. The affected subject tires meet or exceed all applicable FMVSS
performance standards.
    2. The subject tires will not be affected based on performance,
durability, or safety they are designed and build for.
    Hankook has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected the
noncompliance so that all future production of these Roadhandler Sport
(H432) tires will comply with FMVSS No. 139.
    In summation, Hankook believes that the described noncompliance of
the subject tires is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety, and that
its petition, to exempt from providing recall notification of
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118 and remedying the recall
noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120 should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject tires that Hankook no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after Hankook
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

    Issued on: December 4, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-29405 Filed 12-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 43958-43959]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2299-074]

Turlock Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District;
Notice of Application for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments,
Motions To Intervene, and Protests

July 19, 2010.
    Take notice that the following application has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Amendment of License.
    b. Project No.: 2299-074.
    c. Date Filed: May 24, 2010.
    d. Applicant: Turlock Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation
District.
    e. Name of Project: Don Pedro Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Tuolumne River, Tuolumne County, California.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 USC 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Turlock Irrigation District, Robert M. Nees,
Director of Water Resources and Regulatory Affairs, P.O. Box 949,
Turlock, CA 95381, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; and Modesto Irrigation
District, Greg Salyer, Resource Planning and Development Manager, P.O.
Box 4060, Modesto, CA 95352, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mrs. Anumzziatta Purchiaroni, telephone (202) 502-
6191, and e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protest:
August 20, 2010.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.

    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy
of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative
of the Applicant specified in the particular application.
    k. Description of Request: The licensees are proposing to delete
from the license the following transmission lines: 28.5-mile long, 69-
kV Don Pedro-Tuolumne Lines 1 and 2 extending from the Don Pedro
switchyard to the Turlock Irrigation District's Tuolumne Substation;
(2) 23-mile-long, 69-kV Don Pedro-Hawkins Line extending from the Don
Pedro switchyard to the Turlock Irrigation District's Hawkins
Substation; and (3) 22.4-mile-long, 69-kV Don Pedro-Reinway North and
South lines extending from the Don Pedro Switchyard to the Modesto
Irrigation District's Reinway Substation. The licensees state that the
lines have become part of the interconnected transmission system in
California, and thus are no longer ``primary lines.''
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information about this filing
may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may
also register Online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS,'' ``PROTEST,'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as applicable,
and the Project Number of the particular application to which the
filing refers.
    p. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.
    q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-18280 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22587-22589]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09817]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80645; File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-12]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees

May 10, 2017
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 9, 2017, Bats BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. 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)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-Members of the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.bats.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule to: (i) Add a new
tier under footnote 1, Add/Remove Volume Tiers; and (ii) modify its
description of fee code PX.
Proposed New Tier
    The Exchange currently offers four tiers under footnote 1, Add/
Remove Volume Tiers that offer reduced fees for displayed orders that
yield fee codes B,\6\ V \7\ and Y,\8\ and an enhanced rebate for orders
that add liquidity yielding fee codes BB,\9\ N \10\ and W.\11\ The
Exchange now proposes to add a new tier under footnote 1, to be known
as Tier 4, under which a Member would be charged a reduced fee of
$0.0016 per share on orders that yield fee codes B, V and Y, where that
Member has an ADAV \12\ greater than or equal to 0.25% of the TCV \13\
and a Step-Up ADAV greater than or equal to 0.05% of the TCV from April
2017 baseline.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Fee code B is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape B) and is assessed a fee of $0.0018 per
share. See the Exchange's fee schedule available at http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
    \7\ Fee code V is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape A) and is assessed a fee of $0.0018 per
share. Id.
    \8\ Fee code Y is appended to displayed orders that add
liquidity to BYX (Tape C) and is assessed a fee of $0.0018 per
share. Id.
    \9\ Fee code BB is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape B) and is assessed a rebate of $0.0010 per share. Id.
    \10\ Fee code N is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape C) and is assessed a rebate of $0.0010 per share. Id.
    \11\ Fee code W is appended to orders that remove liquidity from
BYX (Tape A) and is assessed a rebate of $0.0010 per share. See the
Exchange's fee schedule available at http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
    \12\ ``ADAV'' means average daily volume calculated as the
number of shares added per day on a monthly basis. Id.
    \13\ ``TCV'' means total consolidated volume calculated as the
volume reported by all exchanges and trade reporting facilities to a
consolidated transaction reporting plan for the month for which the
fees apply. Id.
    \14\ With the addition of proposed Tier 4 under footnote 1, the
Exchange proposes to renumber current Tier 4 as Tier 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with this change, the Exchange proposes to add a
definition of Step-Up ADAV to the ``Definitions'' section of the fee
schedule. As proposed, ``Step-Up ADAV'' would be defined as ``ADAV in
the relevant baseline month subtracted from current ADAV.'' The
Exchange proposes to add this definition in connection with the new
tier.
Fee Code PX
    Fee code PX is appended to orders routed using the RMPL routing
strategy \15\ to destinations not covered by fee code PL \16\ or
destinations covered by routing strategy RMPT. Orders appended with fee
code PX are changed a fee of $0.0012 per share. The Exchange proposes
to amend the description of fee code PX in order to align it with the
description of fee code PX on Bats' affiliate exchange, Bats EDGA
Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA'').\17\ As amended, the description of fee code
PX would state ``[r]outed using RMPL routing strategy to a destination
not covered by Fee Code PL, or routed using RMPT routing strategy.''
The Exchange notes that this change is purely clerical and does not
amend the orders to which fee code PX is appended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79603 (December 19,
2016), 81 FR 94440 (December 23, 2016) (SR-BatsBYX-2016-41) (``RMPL
Filing'').
    \16\ Fee code PL is appended to orders routed to Bats BZX
Exchange, Inc., Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc., New York Stock Exchange,
Inc., NYSE Arca, Inc. and the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC using RMPL
routing strategy, and is assessed a fee of $0.0030 per share. See
the Exchange's fee schedule available at http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/byx/.
    \17\ See EDGA's fee schedule available at http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edga/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement the above changes to its fee
schedule immediately.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Exchange initially filed the proposed fee change on May
1, 2017. (ST-BatsBYX-2017-09) [sic]. On May 9, 2017, the Exchange
withdrew the proposed fee change and submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\19\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\20\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed New Tier
    The Exchange believes that the proposed tier under footnote 1 is
equitable and reasonable because such pricing programs reward a
Member's growth pattern on the Exchange and such increased volume will
allow the Exchange to continue to provide and potentially expand the
its incentive

programs. The Exchange believes that providing incentives to Members
that demonstrate an increase over their April 2017 Step-Up ADAV through
the proposed tier offers an additional, flexible way to encourage
Members to add liquidity to the Exchange. The Exchange believes that
the proposed tier is reasonable, fair and equitable because the
liquidity from the proposed tier also benefits all investors by
deepening the Exchange's liquidity pool, offering additional
flexibility for all investors to enjoy cost savings, supporting the
quality of price discovery, promoting market transparency and improving
investor protection. The proposed definition of Step-Up Add ADV is also
reasonable as it helps to describe the tier's required criteria and is
identical to that adopted by other exchanges.\21\ These pricing
programs are also not unfairly discriminatory in that it is available
to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See the Bats BZX Exchange, Inc., fee schedule available at
http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/bzx/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, volume-based fees such as that proposed herein have
been widely adopted by exchanges and are equitable because they are
open to all Members on an equal basis and provide additional benefits
or discounts that are reasonably related to: (i) The value to an
exchange's market quality; (ii) associated higher levels of market
activity, such as higher levels of liquidity provision and/or growth
patterns; and (iii) the introduction of higher volumes of orders into
the price and volume discovery processes. The Exchange believes that
the proposed tier is a reasonable, fair and equitable, and not an
unfairly discriminatory allocation of fees and rebates, because it will
provide Members with an additional incentive to reach certain
thresholds on the Exchange.
Fee Code PX
    The Exchange believes that the proposed amendment to the
description of fee code PX is reasonable and equitable because this
change is purely clerical and does not amend the orders to which fee
code PX is appended. The Exchange also believes that the proposal is
non-discriminatory because it applies uniformly to all Members. The
proposed change is intended to align it with the description of an
identical fee code on Bats' affiliate exchange, EDGA.\22\ Therefore,
the Exchange believes that the proposed change will make the fee
schedule clearer and eliminate potential investor confusion, thereby
removing impediments to and perfecting the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, protecting
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See EDGA's fee schedule available at http://www.bats.com/us/equities/membership/fee_schedule/edga/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that this change represents a significant departure from previous
pricing offered by the Exchange or from pricing offered by the
Exchange's competitors. The proposed rates would apply uniformly to all
Members, and Members may opt to disfavor the Exchange's pricing if they
believe that alternatives offer them better value. Accordingly, the
Exchange does not believe that the proposed changes will impair the
ability of Members or competing venues to maintain their competitive
standing in the financial markets. Further, excessive fees would serve
to impair an exchange's ability to compete for order flow and members
rather than burdening competition. The Exchange believes that its
proposal would not burden intramarket competition because the proposed
rate would apply uniformly to all Members.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

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 \23\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\24\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \24\ 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 No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-12 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 No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-12. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-12, and should be
submitted on or before June 6,  2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\25\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09817 Filed 5-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 20 (Friday, January 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 5105]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01734]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Meeting

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada Power Company.......................  ER10-2475-006, EL15-22-000
Sierra Pacific Power Company...............  ER10-2474-006
PacifiCorp.................................  ER10-3246-003
Pinyon Pines Wind I, LLC...................  ER13-520-002
Pinyon Pines Wind II, LLC..................  ER13-521-002
Solar Star California XIX, LLC.............  ER13-1441-002
Solar Star California XX, LLC..............  ER13-1442-002
Topaz Solar Farms LLC......................  ER12-1626-003
CalEnergy, LLC.............................  ER13-1266-003
CE Leathers Company........................  ER13-1267-002
Del Ranch Company..........................  ER13-1268-002
Elmore Company.............................  ER13-1269-002
Fish Lake Power LLC........................  ER13-1270-002
Salton Sea Power Generation Company........  ER13-1271-002
Salton Sea Power L.L.C.....................  ER13-1272-002
Vulcan/BN Geothermal Power Company.........  ER13-1273-002
Yuma Cogeneration Associates...............  ER10-2605-006
MidAmerican Energy Company.................
Bishop Hill Energy II LLC..................
Cordova Energy Company LLC.................
Power Resources, Ltd.......................
Saranac Power Partners, L.P................
Agua Caliente Solar, LLC...................  ER12-21-013]
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On Thursday, January 29, 2015, Commission staff will meet with
Nevada Power Company and its affiliates (collectively, the Berkshire
MBR Sellers) in Washington, DC. The purpose of the meeting is to
discuss matters related to the Commission's order issued in the above-
captioned proceedings, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power
Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation concerning the
justness and reasonableness of the Berkshire MBR Sellers' market-based
rate authorities in the PacifiCorp-East, PacifiCorp-West, Idaho Power
Company, and NorthWestern balancing authority areas. Nevada Power
Company, 149 FERC ] 61,219 (2014). The meeting will begin at 10 a.m. at
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission headquarters building located
at 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. All interested parties
are invited to observe the meeting in person or to listen to the
meeting by telephone. For further information please contact Byron
Corum at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.

    Dated: January 22, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-01734 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 Facilities that use limited amounts of ethylene oxide ( EO), as specified in Sections 63.362 and 63.367, are only required to record EO use on a monthly basis. This Information Collection Request ( ICR) estimates that 10 percent or approximately 12 facilities subject to this standard record EO use on a monthly basis. SF 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O) ( Renewal)

1. Identification of the Information Collection 1( a) Title of the Information Collection NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O) ( Renewal)

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP) for the regulations published at 40 CFR part 63, subpart O were proposed on March 7, 1997, and promulgated on December 6, 1994. These regulations apply to new and existing commercial ethylene oxide ( EO) sterilization and fumigation facilities using 1 ton of EO ( as defined in 40 CFR Section 63.361) after December 6, 1994. This information is being collected to assure compliance with part 63, subpart O.

In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to NESHAP.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) regional office.

We estimate that there will be an average of 119 facilities subject to this regulation over the next three years1. In addition, we estimate that two ( 2) new or reconstructed facilities will become subject to the subpart O standards per year over the next three years. The Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Association, which represents the vast majority of facilities subject to this standard, was consulted to determine these estimates. 2 The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) approved the currently active information collection request ( ICR) without any " Terms of Clearance."

2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants. These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction. In addition, Section 114( a) states that the Administrator may require any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

( A) Establish and maintain such records; ( B) make such reports; ( C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; ( D) sample such emissions ( in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); ( E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; ( F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114( a)( 3); and ( G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, EO emissions from sterilization facilities cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart O.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data The control of EO emissions from sterilization facilities requires not only the installation of properly designed equipment, but also the operation and maintenance of that equipment. Emissions of EO from sterilization facilities are the result of operation of sterilization chambers. The subject standards are achieved by the reduction of EO emissions using acid water scrubbers or catalytic/ thermal oxidizers. The notifications required in the applicable regulations are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the acid water scrubbers or catalytic oxidizers or thermal oxidizers are operating properly and the regulations are 3 being met. Performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency's record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standards, and serve as a record of the operating conditions under which compliance was achieved. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. The information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NESHAP continue to operate the control equipment in compliance with the regulation. Adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to ensure compliance with the applicable regulations, as required by the Clean Air Act. The information collected from recordkeeping and reporting requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court. This standard relies on acid water scrubbers or catalytic/ thermal oxidizers to reduce emissions of EO. The notifications required in the applicable regulations are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the regulations are being met. Performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency's record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standards, and serve as a record of the operating conditions under which compliance was achieved.

The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. The information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NESHAP continue to operate the control equipment in compliance with the regulation. Adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting are necessary to ensure compliance with the applicable regulations, as required by the Clean Air Act. The information collected from recordkeeping and reporting requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 63, subpart O.

3( a) Nonduplication If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office. Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency. If a state or local agency has adopted their own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards. Therefore, no duplication exists. 4 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register ( 68 FR 27059) on May 19, 2003. No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

3( c) Consultations In estimating the burden associated with this standard, EPA consulted with Joe Hadley, Executive Director, Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Association at ( 202) 296 6300. Members of the Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Association include the vast majority of the facilities subject to this standard. As part of this consultation, Mr. Hadley provided an estimate of the affected number of sources subject to the standard and provided information on the expected growth rate of the EO sterilization industry. The association estimates that there are approximately 117 existing facilities subject to this standard and that only a limited number of new facilities will become subject to the standard over the next three years. Based on this consultation, we estimate that only two ( 2) facilities, one new construction and one reconstruction, will become subject to the standard each year over the next three years. Therefore, over the next three years, the average number of facilities subject to this standard is estimated to be 119. Of these 119 facilities, we estimate that 10 percent, or approximately 12 facilities, will use limited amounts of EO and, therefore, will only be required to maintain records of EO use as specified in Sections 63.362 and 63.367 of the standard. In addition, we assume that the two ( 2) new facilities added per year will not be limited EO use facilities and will be subject to the emission reduction requirements in the standard.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards. Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and emission limitations are met. If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

3( e) General Guidelines None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR Part 1320, Section 1320.5.

These standards require affected facilities to maintain all records, including reports and notifications for at least five years. This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards. EPA believes that the five year records retention requirement is consistent the part 70 5 permit program and the five year statute of limitations on which the permit program is based. Also, the retention of records for five years would allow EPA to establish the compliance history of a source and any pattern of compliance for purposes of determining the appropriate level of enforcement action. Historically, EPA has found that the most flagrant violators frequently have violations extending beyond the five years. EPA would be prevented from pursuing the worst violators due to the destruction or nonexistence of records if records were retained for less than five years.

3( f) Confidentiality Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, Subpart B  Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3( g) Sensitive Questions None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC and NAICS Codes Respondents are owners or operators of commercial EO sterilization facilities. The United States Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) codes and corresponding North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) codes for EO sterilization facilities are listed in the table below.

Standard Description SIC Codes NAICS Codes 40 CFR part 63, subpart O Medical Equipment Suppliers 3841, 3842 339112, 339113,

Pharmaceutical Suppliers 2832, 2833, 2834, 5122 325411, 325412, 42221 Other Health Related Facilities 2211, 2821, 2879, 3069, 3079, 3569, 3677, 3693, 3999, 5086 31321, 325211, 32532, 333999, 334416, 337127 6 Standard Description SIC Codes NAICS Codes Spice Manufacturers 2034, 2035, 2046, 2099, 5149 311423, 311421, 311941, 311942, 42249 Contract Sterilizers 7218, 7399, 8091 812332 Libraries, Museums, and Archives 8231, 8411 51412, 71211 Laboratories 0279, 7391, 7397, 8071, 8922 112519, 54199, 621512, 621511, 54169 4( b) Information Requested ( i) Data Items All data in this ICR that is recorded and/ or reported is required by the NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O)

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports Notification of Applicability 63.9( a)

Notification of Construction/ Reconstruction 63.9( b)( 3) and ( 4)

Notification of Actual Start up 63.9( b)( 2) and ( 4)

Notification of Initial Performance Test 63.9( e)

Notification of Compliance Status 63.9( h)

Requests for Extension of Compliance 63.9( c)

Requests for Waivers 63.7( h)

Request for Alternative Methods/ Monitoring 63.8( f) 7 Monitoring Reports Report of performance test results 63.10( d)( 2)

Reports of noncompliance ( including excess emission reports) 63.10( e)( 3)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping Records of control equipment maintenance; inspections; malfunctions ( occurrence, duration, and corrections); continuous monitoring systems malfunctions or in operations; calibrations and parameters; measurements to demonstrate compliance; performance test results; daily and monthly inspections; and documents supporting initial notifications and notification of compliance status 63.10( c)( 1) and ( 5), 63.10( b)( 2)( ii), ( iv xii), ( xiv)

Retain records for five years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, corrective action, maintenance record, or report. The most recent two years of records must be retained at the facility. 63.7( g)( 3), 63.10( b)( 1)

Emission testing ( occurrence/ duration) 63.10( b)( 2)( ii), ( vi xii), ( xiv)

Records of EO use ( retain records for five years) 63.9( b)( 2)

Electronic Reporting Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides parameter data in an automated way, e. g., leaks and spills of mercury. Although personnel at the source still need to evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping. In addition, some regulatory agencies are setting up electronic reporting systems to allow sources to report electronically which is reducing the reporting burden. However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used by the regulatory agencies. It is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

( ii) Respondent Activities 8 Respondent Activities Read instructions.

All monitoring systems and equipment must be installed, operational, and properly calibrated before the performance test.

Perform initial performance test, using the control device efficiency procedures in Section 63.365 including reference methods 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D for measuring flow rates, 18 or 25A for measuring the concentration of EO, and the sampling analysis procedures in ASTM D 3695 88 for measuring ethylene glycol concentrations. All tests are repeated if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

5. The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5( a) Agency Activities EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information. 9 Agency Activities Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System ( AFS).

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated. Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standard. Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance. AFS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance and annual emission inventory data for more than 100,000 industrial and government owned facilities. EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner or operator for five years.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility A majority of the affected facilities are large entities ( e. g., large businesses). However, the impact on small entities ( i. e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation. Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities. The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities. To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced. 10 5( d) Collection Schedule The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( NESHAP) for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O).

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this ICR. The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified. Responses to this information collection are mandatory.

The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 8,662 hours. These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Labor Costs This ICR uses the following labor rates: $ 93.09 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $ 64.13 per hour for Technical labor, and $ 39.65 per hour for Clerical labor. These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2003, " Table 10. Private industry, by occupational and industry group." The following rates are from column 1, " Total compensation." The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

Managerial $ 93.09 ($ 44.33 + 110%) Technical $ 64.13 ($ 30.54 + 110%) 11 2 The cost of the computer and gas chromatograph are estimated to be $ 2,500 and $ 30,000 respectively. Clerical $ 39.65 ($ 18.88 + 110%)

( ii) Estimating Capital/ Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activities in the subject standard( s) are both labor costs which are addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous monitoring. The capital/ startup costs are one time costs when a facility becomes subject to the regulation. The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor( s) and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

( iii) Capital/ Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs Capital/ Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs ( A) Continuous Monitoring Device ( B) Capital/ Startu p Cost for One Respondent ( C) Number of New Respondents ( D) Total Capital/ Startup Cost ( BxC) ( E) Annual O& M Costs for One Respondent ( F) Number of Respondents with O& M ( G) Total O& M, ( ExF)

Computer equipment and gas chromatograph used to continuously monitor EO emissions to aeration room and back chamber vents. 2 $ 32,500 2 $ 65,000 $ 5,500 106 $ 583,000 The total capital/ startup costs for this ICR are $ 65,000. This is the total of column D in the above table. These costs are shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( a), Total annualized capital/ startup costs.

The total operation and maintenance ( O& M) costs for this ICR are estimated to be $ 583,000. This is the total of column G. These costs are shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( b), Total annual costs ( O& M).

The total respondent costs in block 14 have been calculated as the addition of the 12 capital/ startup costs, and the annual operation and maintenance costs. The average annual cost for capital/ startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $ 648,000. This cost is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( c), Total annualized cost requested. The numbers in block 14 of the OMB 83 I form are rounded to show the cost in thousands of dollars. The continuous monitoring costs that are included in this section consist only of those capital/ startup and O& M costs that a source incurs as a result of the standard. Some continuous monitoring costs may not be included in this section. For instance, if a particular industry typically utilizes a control device that must have a continuous monitor ( e. g., temperature, pressure drop, etc.) to function properly, and the recordkeeping of additional measurements beyond the minimum is required by the standard, then there is no capital/ startup or O& M cost, but there is a labor cost to record the additional readings. Such a cost would not appear in this section, but in the industry burden Section 6( d) below.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the reported information. EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $ 24,200. This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial $ 53.22 ( GS 13, Step 5, $ 33.26 x 1.6) Technical $ 39.49 ( GS 12, Step 1, $ 24.68 x 1.6) Clerical $ 21.38 ( GS 6, Step 3, $ 13.36 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management ( OPM) " 2003 General Schedule" which excludes locality rates of pay. These rates can be obtained from the OPM web site, http:// www. opm. gov/ oca/ payrates/ index/ htm. Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities, attached.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Based on our research for this ICR, an average of 119 facilities are subject to the standard over the next three years. However, we estimate that 10 percent or approximately 12 facilities, will use only limited amounts of EO as specific in Sections 63.362 and 63.367 and therefore will not be required to submit reports. It is also estimated that two ( 2) new or reconstructed sources will become subject to the regulation in the next three years and that both of these facilities will be required to submit reports. 13 3 New respondents include sources with constructed, reconstructed and modified affected facilities.

4 Weighted average. Number of respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents Respondents That Submit Reports Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports Year ( A) Number of New Respondents3 ( B) Number of Existing Respondents ( C) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports ( D) Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents ( E) Number of Respondents ( E= A+ B+ C D)

1 2 105 12 1 118 2 2 106 12 1 119 3 2 107 12 1 120 Average 2 106 12 1 119 . To avoid double counting respondents, column D is subtracted. As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three year period of this ICR is 119. This number appears on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( a), Number of respondents.

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses ( A) Number of New Respondents ( B) Number of Reports for New Respondents ( C) Number of Existing Respondents ( D) Number of Reports for Existing Respondents ( F) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports ( E) Total Annual Responses E=( AxB)+( CxD)+ F 2 6.1 4 106 2 12 236 ( rounded) 14 The number of Total Annual Responses is 236. This number is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( b), Total annual responses.

The Total Hours Requested is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 13( c). The total annual labor costs are estimated to be $ 547,959. The annual labor costs are not shown on the OMB 83 I form. Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O)

Note that the total annual capital and O& M costs to the regulated entity are $ 648,000. This number is shown on the OMB 83 I form in block 14( c), Total annualized cost requested. These costs are detailed in Section 6( b)( iii), Capital/ Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables The bottom line burden hours and cost tables for both the Agency and the respondents appear in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Costs, NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O) and Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Ethylene Oxide Emissions from Sterilization Facilities ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart O).

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden The increase in burden from the most recently approved ICR is primarily due to an adjustment in the number of sources subject to the standard, specifically an increase from 100 to 119 existing facilities. The increase in the O& M costs is due to an error in the previous ICR. The previous ICR only calculated O& M costs for new facilities. It did not account for O& M costs associated with existing facilities subject to the standard. The increase in labor costs associated with this ICR is due to the increase in wage rates provided by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Statistics.

6( g) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 37 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to 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; to 15 adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; to train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to 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 valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Numbers for EPA's regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number OECA 2003 0033, which is available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center is ( 202) 566 1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or to view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select " search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D. C. 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number OECA 2003 0033 and OMB Control Number 2060 0283 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.


8894 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 38 / Wednesday, February 26, 2003 / Notices any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking? Under Contract Number GS   00K97AFD2140, Delivery Order Number 2W   0947   YBSW, Geologics Corporation, of 5285 Shawnee Road, Suite 210, Alexandria, VA, will assist the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT) in providing technical and administrative support for meetings related to investigation of chemicals and biotechnology products for possible regulatory or other control actions. They will also provide computer data base support related to providing information on chemical regulatory actions and related policy decisions. In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306( j), EPA has determined that under Contract Number GS   00K97AFD2140, Delivery Order Number 2W   0947   YBSW, Geologics Coporation will require access to CBI submitted to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA, to perform successfully the duties specified under the contract. Geologics personnel was given access to information submitted to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA. Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be CBI. Geologics was granted a waiver July 31, 2002. This waiver was necessary to allow Geologics to assist the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT) in the activities listed above. EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA, that the Agency may provide Geologics access to these CBI materials on a need to know basis only. All access to TSCA CBI under this contract will take place at EPA Headquarters. Geologics will be required to adhere to all provisions of EPA's TSCA Confidential Business Information Security Manual. Clearance for access to TSCA CBI under this contract may continue until July 31, 2004. Geologics personnel will be required to sign nondisclosure agreements and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures before they are permitted access to TSCA CBI.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Confidential business information.

Dated: February 10, 2003. Allan S. Abramson, Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. [ FR Doc. 03   4250 Filed 2   25   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT   2003   0004; FRL   7293   3]

Access to Confidential Business Information by Dyncorp Systems and Solutions, LLC AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its prime contractor Dyncorp Systems and Solutions, LLC ( Dyncorp) of Chantilly, VA and 10 of its subcontractors access to information which has been submitted to EPA under all sections of the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA). Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be Confidential Business Information ( CBI). DATES: Access to the confidential data submitted to EPA under all sections of TSCA occurred as a result of an approved waiver dated January 13, 2003, which requested granting Dyncorp and its subcontractors immediate access to all sections of TSCA CBI. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara A. Cunningham, Acting Director, Environmental Assistance Division ( 7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 554   1404; e mail address: TSCAHotline epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Notice Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to those persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances under TSCA. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPPT   2003   0004. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102   Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 17: 54 Feb 25, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26FEN1. SGM 26FEN1 RECEIVED OPPT NCIC 2003 FEB26 7: 17AM OPPT 2003 0004 0001 8895 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 38 / Wednesday, February 26, 2003 / Notices of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking? Under GSA Contract Number GS00T99ALD0204, Task Order Number T0002AJMZ39, contractor Dyncorp, of 15000 Conference Center Drive, Chantilly, VA and its subcontractors Excel Management Systems, of 691 N. High Street, 2nd Floor, Columbus, OH; IBM, 700 Park Dr., Building 662, Research Triangle Park, NC; Institute for Disabilities Research and Training of 11323 Amherst Avenue, Silver Spring, MD; Kenrob, Inc. of 44084 Riverside Parkway, Suite 125, Leesburg, VA; Madision Research of 401 Wynn Drive, Huntsville, AL; OAO, 2222 East NC Highway 54, Beta Building, Suite 220, Durham, NC; Paloma Systems of 7002 Evergreen Court, Annandale, VA; PlanetGov of 14155 Newbrook Drive, Chantilly, VA; Superlative Technologies, Inc. of 8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 425, McLean, VA; and Veridian of 1200 South Hayes Street, Suite 1000, Arlington, VA, will assist the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPTS) in computer operations and maintenance of TSCA CBI Computer Systems and Communications Network, linking CBI sites, located in Washington, DC. Dyncorp and its subcontractors will also assist in maintaining and operating the EPA CBI computer facilities located in Research Triangle Park, NC. In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306( j), EPA has determined that under GSA Contract Number GS00T99ALD0204, Task Order Number T0002AJMZ39, Dyncorp and its subcontractors will require access to CBI submitted to EPA under all sections of TSCA to perform successfully the duties specified under the contract. Dyncorp and its subcontractor personnel were given access to information submitted to EPA under all sections of TSCA. Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be CBI. Dyncorp was granted a waiver on January 13, 2003. This waiver was necessary to allow Dyncorp and its subcontractors to assist EPA in the activities listed above. EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information under all sections of TSCA that EPA may provide Dyncorp and its subcontractors access to these CBI materials on a need to know basis only. All access to TSCA CBI under this contract will take place at EPA Headquarters and at Research Triangle Park, NC facilities. No access will occur at the Research Triangle Park, NC facility until after it has been approved for the storage of TSCA CBI. Dyncorp and its subcontractors will be authorized access to TSCA CBI at EPA Headquarters and Research Triangle Park, NC, in accordance with EPA TSCA Confidential Business Information Security Manual. Clearance for access to TSCA CBI under this contract may continue until September 30, 2007. Dyncorp and its subcontractor personnel will be required to sign nondisclosure agreements and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures before they are permitted access to TSCA CBI.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Confidential business information.

Dated: February 10, 2003. Allan S. Abramson, Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. [ FR Doc. 03   4251 Filed 2   25   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7455   6]

Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission for the Northeast United States AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency is announcing the 2003 Annual Meeting of the Ozone Transport Commission ( OTC). This meeting is for the OTC to deal with appropriate matters within the Ozone Transport Region in the Northeast and Mid Atlantic States, as provided for under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. This meeting is not subject to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92   463, as amended. DATES: The meeting will be held on March 4, 2003 starting at 10 a. m. ( EST). ADDRESSES: The Marriott Hotel at Metro Center, 775 Twelfth ( 12th) Street NW., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judith M. Katz, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103; ( 215) 814   2100. For Documents and Press Inquiries Contact: Ozone Transport Commission, 444 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 638, Washington, DC 20001; ( 202) 508   3840; e mail: ozone@ sso. org; Web site: http:// www. sso. org/ otc. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 contain at Section 184 provisions for the `` Control of Interstate Ozone Air Pollution.'' Section 184( a) establishes an `` Ozone Transport Region'' ( OTR) comprised of the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, parts of Virginia and the District of Columbia. The Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation of the Environmental Protection Agency convened the first meeting of the commission in New York City on May 7, 1991. The purpose of the Ozone Transport Commission is to deal with ground level ozone formation, transport, and control within the OTR. The purpose of this notice is to announce that this Commission will meet on March 4, 2003. The meeting will be held at the address noted earlier in this notice. Section 176A( b)( 2) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 specifies that the meetings of the Ozone Transport Commission are not subject to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This meeting will be open to the public as space permits. Type of Meeting: Open. AGENDA: Copies of the final agenda will be available from the OTC office ( 202) 508   3840 ( by e mail: ozone@ sso. org or via our Web site at http:// www. sso. org/ otc) by close of business, Tuesday, February 25, 2003. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss ways in which OTC states can meet their statutory and regulatory responsibilities under the Clean Air Act. Special emphasis will be given to stationary and mobile source control measures to reduce precursors of ground level ozone and next steps to reduce ground level ozone in the context of a multi pollutant emission reduction program. The OTC is also expected to address issues related to the transport of ozone into its region, and to discuss potential regional emission control measures.

Dated: Feburary 14, 2003. Donald S. Welsh, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. [ FR Doc. 03   4519 Filed 2   25   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 17: 54 Feb 25, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 26FEN1. SGM 26FEN1


[Federal Register: August 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 165)]
[Notices]
[Page 52589-52590]
[DOCID:fr26au10-112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (SEIS) for the Cal Black Memorial Airport at Halls Crossing,
UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Northwest Mountain Region of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) as lead agency and the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) as a cooperating agency announce that the FAA will prepare a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address issues
arising from the 1993 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Decision
concerning the development of Cal Black Memorial Airport. This
supplemental EIS does not involve any new development or project at the
airport. The Cal Black Memorial Airport opened in April 1992. To ensure
that all significant issues related to the action are identified,
additional scoping comments are requested.
    Scoping Meeting: Scoping was conducted in 1990 concerning the
development of this replacement airport and the transfer of land from
the BLM to San Juan County. Subsequent to the 1993 10th Circuit Court
Decision, additional scoping was conducted in 1995 and 1998. Additional
scoping is being conducted prior to preparing the Supplemental EIS. A
scoping meeting for agency representatives will be held at 2 p.m. MST
and a scoping meeting for the general public will be held at 6 p.m. MST
on Wednesday, September 22, 2010. The meetings will be conducted in
Blanding, Utah at the College of Eastern Utah San Juan Campus: 639 West
100 South, Blanding, Utah 84511.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kevin Luey, Project Manager,
Federal Aviation Administration, Northwest Mountain Region, Airports
Division, Denver Airports District Office, 26805 E. 68th Ave., Suite
224, Denver, CO 80249-6361 or via E-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Telephone--(303) 342-1253.
    Submit Written Comments, Send To: Mr. Kevin Luey, Project Manager,
Federal Aviation Administration, Northwest Mountain Region, Airports
Division, Denver Airports District Office, 26805 E. 68th Ave., Suite
224, Denver, CO 80249-6361 or via E-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    To be considered, written comments must be received on or before
September 30, 2010.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Halls Crossing Airport was located within
the boundary of the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, a unit of the
National Park Service (NPS). Due to safety issues with this airport, an
EIS was undertaken concerning the development of a replacement airport.
In 1990, the FAA issued a Draft and Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the development of a replacement Airport. In August 1990,
the FAA issued a record of decision approving the development of Cal
Black Memorial Airport. The FAA determined in the record of decision
that the use of the BLM lands upon which the airport was built were
reasonably necessary for the project. Accordingly, the BLM issued a
Patent for the airport land to San Juan County on September 25, 1990.
In reaching its approval, the FAA determined that no significant
impacts would result from the new airport to the recreational
experience of visitors to the recreational area.
    In 1990, the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA), et
al brought suit against the FAA concerning the adequacy of the EIS and
the adequacy of the BLM Plan Amendment and land transfer process. In
its July 7, 1993, decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit,
remanded the EIS decision back to the FAA for further environmental
analysis of aircraft noise impacts to the recreational use of public
lands and the BLM's plan amendment and transfer of land.
    On November 17, 2008 the BLM issued the Monticello Field Office
Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan. The

document provides guidance for the management of Federal lands
administered by the BLM in San Juan County and a small portion of Grant
County in south-east Utah and includes provisions for the disposal of
the Cal Black Memorial Airport property.
    Thus, the purpose of the Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement is to address the requirements of the U.S. Court of Appeals
findings. The scope of the EIS will include: (1) The measurement of
actual aircraft noise levels, (2) the evaluation of existing and future
aircraft noise levels; and (3) if significant impacts are identified,
the evaluation of alternative means of mitigating the significant
impact. In addition, the Supplemental EIS will review the transfer of
land from BLM to San Juan County for airport purposes.

    Issued in Denver, CO on Tuesday, August 17, 2010.
John P. Bauer,
Manager, Denver Airports District Office (Airports Division), Northwest
Mountain Region.
[FR Doc. 2010-21211 Filed 8-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P