Photochemical Modeling Analysis of 8 Hour Ozone for LaPorte County Indiana Department of Environmental Management Office of Air Quality and Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium July 15, 2004 2 Introduction The purpose of this photochemical modeling analysis is to review available modeling information to determine the ability of LaPorte County to achieve attainment in 2007 and to assess the impact of LaPorte County emissions on local monitors.

Given the time constraints and lack of availability of updated emissions inventories and meteorological files, limited new modeling and a review of older modeling was used to make this determination. For new modeling, a zero out approach, or removal of all man made emissions in LaPorte County, was determined to be the best way to show the impact of reductions of local emissions on LaPorte County and downwind ozone monitors. Additional modeling is available from the US EPA's " Technical Support Document for Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements: Air Quality Modeling Analyses", EPA 420 R 00 028, December 2000, and the LADCO White Paper, " 8 Hour Ozone Assessment", May 2, 2001.

These modeling results consistently demonstrate that LaPorte County is heavily influenced by transported pollutants, that local emissions reductions will do little to reduce local ozone concentrations, and county is on track to achieve attainment by 2007.

Zero out Modeling, 2004 The purpose of this photochemical modeling analysis was to determine the impact of LaPorte County emissions on ozone monitors located in LaPorte County and downwind areas. Two modeling scenarios were run and ozone impacts at the two ozone monitoring sites in LaPorte County were analyzed. The results show that LaPorte County is largely influenced by regional transport of ozone and ozone precursors and local emission control strategies will not greatly reduce ozone concentrations within LaPorte County. Impact on downwind areas was shown by maps with ozone isopleths showing the differences between scenarios.

Photochemical Model and Model Inputs Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions The photochemical model that was used for this analysis was the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions ( CAMx4). CAMx4 is a one atmosphere photochemical model that allows for 2 way nested grid with a 12 kilometer grid nested in a 36 kilometer grid. The purpose of a nested grid is to allow for better pollutant transport and re circulation of air.

Grid Resolution and Modeling Domains The photochemical modeling domain covers the eastern and central United States. The grid resolution used in the modeling consists of 36 kilometer grid cells with a 2 way nested grid consisting of 12 kilometer grid cells centered over the Midwest and Great Lakes region. CAMx is run vertically in the atmosphere at 16 layers with the top layer at approximately 15 kilometers above ground level.

Meteorological Inputs Meteorological input data was processed using the Mesoscale Model ( MM5) version 3.5. The meteorological data output from MM5 are translated by processing utility programs to be used by the photochemical model. 3 The meteorological data that was used for this modeling analysis was taken from the June 15, 2002 through August 15th, 2002 period.

Emissions Inputs All anthropogenic ( man made) emissions from point, area, mobile and biogenic ( naturally occurring) sources that were used in the photochemical modeling were processed by the emission model EMS 2003. Point and area source emission inventories were obtained from U. S. EPA through the 1999 National Emissions Inventories ( NEI). On road mobile source inventories were estimated by MOBILE6 model while off road mobile emissions were estimated by U. S. EPA's NONROAD 2002 model. Biogenic emissions were estimated with EMS 2003 using BEIS3.

Future year modeling runs are necessary to determine the impacts that national emission reductions and emission growth estimates will have on future attainment status of an area. In order to process emissions for future year runs, national emission reductions and emission growth estimates were used as well as U. S. EPA emission adjustment factors.

Initial and Boundary Conditions Initial conditions are the background concentrations of pollutants and boundary conditions represent the incoming pollutant concentrations into the modeling domain. Boundary conditions and initial conditions for photochemical modeling were based on profiles from U. S. EPA with a June 2002 version of another photochemical model, Community Multiscale Air Quality modeling system ( CMAQ).

Modeling Results Model Execution Modeling was conducted for days during 2002 where the observed 8 hour concentrations exceeded 85 parts per billion at the two LaPorte County ozone monitors in LaPorte and Michigan City or days leading up to an 8 hour exceedance day. Two modeling scenarios were completed based on the 1999 emissions and projected 2007 emissions. The first scenario compared ozone concentrations based on modeling all 1999 emissions versus modeling 1999 emission minus LaPorte County man made emissions. The second scenario compared resulting ozone concentrations based on modeling all 2007 emissions versus 2007 emissions minus LaPorte County man made emissions. 2007 is the year LaPorte County would be required to attain the ozone standard if classified as " Marginal Non attainment" if EPA grants a bump down request.

Model performance is not yet at an acceptable level to demonstrate attainment for State Implementation Planning purposes. However, relative reduction factors ( RRF) or ratios of concentration from the modeling without LaPorte County emissions to the concentrations from the modeling with LaPorte County emissions can be used to determine future year design values for each monitor for bump down modeling. This approach is consistent with U. S. EPA's draft guidance for attainment demonstrations for National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 8 hour ozone where ratios of maximum predicted concentrations for future year emissions to the maximum predicted concentrations for current year emissions are used to determine future year design values for each monitor. 4 Modeling Results Maximum modeled 8 hour ozone concentrations are lower than the observed maximum 8 hour ozone concentrations at the LaPorte and Michigan City monitors. By compiling the modeled results over all the episodes, calculating RRFs and then averaging, a trend can be determined for the scenario being modeled. The key features of the RRF are that the absolute accuracy of the model predictions is not as important and the RRF can be applied to the current ozone design value for an area to estimate the effect of the strategy. The relative reduction factors were calculated for each day for each monitoring site.

An example of the modeling is shown in Figure 1. Examining the modeled results does show reduced ozone concentrations at locations downwind, but since elimination of all man made emissions is an unrealistic scenario, downwind impacts would be a small fraction of this amount, for example, in the case of 15% reductions. However, ozone concentrations locally are not reduced.

Figure 1 8 Hour Ozone Difference Plots for LaPorte County Zero Out Modeling Results of the modeling and RRF analysis are shown below in Figure 2 for Michigan City and LaPorte in Figure 3. Modeling was performed for 1999 emissions and 2007 projected emissions with and without LaPorte County emissions. The average RRFs are calculated to be very near 1.00, meaning that at these local sites, reducing all emissions has little impact. 1 Summary of LaPorte County Bump Down Modeling Analysis Comparison modeling was conducted to determine the affect LaPorte County emissions have on ozone concentrations at the Michigan City and LaPorte ozone monitors. Comparison of results from modeling the removal of all emissions located in LaPorte County vs. all emission sources modeled showed small ozone concentration decreases. Model performance is not adequate at this time but results can be used to determine relative reduction factors to show trends and estimate future ozone design values. Relative reduction factors calculated for Michigan City and LaPorte ozone monitoring sites are close to 1.0, meaning that there will be little impact on ozone concentrations at those sites and future year ozone concentrations will not be greatly impacted. Figure 2  Michigan City Monitoring Site Observed Year 1999   All emissions Year 1999   LaPorte Co. Zero

Out Relative Reduction Factor ( RRF) Observed Year 2007   All emissions Year 2007   LaPorte Co. Zero

Out Relative Reduction Factor ( RRF)

Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb)

June 20, 2002 81 80 81 1.01 81 72 73 1.01 June 21, 2002 107 72 79 1.1 107 76 78 1.03 June 23, 2002 113 79 80 1.01 113 74 74 1.00 June 24, 2002 116 76 80 1.05 116 78 80 1.03 July 3, 2002 107 64 66 Not considered 107 71 72 1.01 July 7, 2002 84 80 72 0.9 84 77 65 0.84 July 14, 2002 83 70 67 0.96 83 65 62 Not considered July 15, 2002 85 82 87 1.06 85 81 83 1.02 July 16, 2002 96 77 81 1.05 96 85 87 1.02 July 17, 2002 88 74 77 1.04 88 76 78 1.03 July 18, 2002 86 81 85 1.05 86 84 85 1.01 Average Relative Reduction Factor 1.02 Average Relative Reduction Factor 1.00 Current Design Value at Michigan City is 93 ppb * 1.02 RRF for 1999 modeling = 95 ppb Projected Design Value Current Design Value at Michigan City is 93 ppb * 1.00 RRF for 2007 modeling = 93 ppb Projected Design Value Figure 3  LaPorte Monitoring Site Observed Year 1999   All emissions Year 1999   LaPorte Co. Zero

Out Relative Reduction Factor ( RRF) Observed Year 2007   All emissions Year 2007   LaPorte Co. Zero

Out Relative Reduction Factor ( RRF)

Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour Max. 8 hour ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb) ( ppb)

June 20, 2002 95 79 77 0.97 95 69 66 Not considered June 21, 2002 95 75 74 0.99 95 70 67 0.96 June 22, 2002 101 73 73 1.0 101 69 67 Not considered June 23, 2002 100 75 73 0.97 100 68 65 Not considered June 24, 2002 116 78 79 1.01 116 75 74 0.99 July 2, 2002 71 66 72 Not considered 71 71 74 1.04 July 3, 2002 89 70 74 1.06 89 72 72 1.00 July 15, 2002 89 76 77 1.01 89 74 72 0.97 July 16, 2002 111 80 88 1.1 111 84 87 1.04 July 17, 2002 84 72 75 1.04 84 71 70 0.99 July 18, 2002 96 65 74 Not considered 96 68 71 Not considered Average Relative Reduction Factor 1.02 Average Relative Reduction Factor 1.00 Current Design Value at LaPorte is 87 ppb * 1.02 RRF for 1999 modeling = 89 ppb Projected Design Value Current Design Value at LaPorte is 87 ppb * 1.00 RRF for 2007 modeling = 87 ppb Projected Design Value 0 US EPA Heavy Duty Engines and Fuel Standards, 2000 This document described the procedures and results of the air quality modeling analyses used to support the Heavy Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel ( HDE) final rulemaking. The air quality modeling was conducted to support several components of the rulemaking. Included in this document were assessments of the impact of the new standards on existing monitoring locations in the eastern United States. Among these were the two monitors located in LaPorte County. In Appendix D, there is a spreadsheet of relative reduction factors, which includes these two sites. The information below is taken from that spreadsheet. The column of interest is the " RRF 2007 Base." The 2007 Base scenario contains controls " on the books" for that year, such as the NOx SIP Call, and calculates the RRF from implementation of these programs.

APPENDIX D 8 Hour Relative Reduction Factors Site Id. State County Area name RRF 2007 Base RRF 2020 Base RRF 2020 Control RRF 2030 Base RRF 2030 Control 180910005 IN LA PORTE CO LA PORTE CO, IN 0.9180 0.9026 0.8855 0.9207 0.8974 180910010 IN LA PORTE CO LA PORTE CO, IN 0.9104 0.8892 0.8677 0.9070 0.8781 The Michigan City site, 180910005, has the higher design value for LaPorte County. This modeling, which was based upon the design value at that time ( 1995 1997) of 91 ppb, projected the 2007 design value to be 84 ppb . The current design value is 93 ppb. Applying the RRF to that design value results in a 2007 projected design value of 85 ppb.

LADCO White Paper, 2002 The purpose of this report was to begin to assess what it will take to attain the new 8 hour standard in the Lake Michigan area. It took modeling which was performed to support the 1 hour attainment demonstration for the Lake Michigan area, and applied 8 hour metrics. This modeling was conducted for the future year of 2007, the attainment year for the Chicago Gary Milwaukee non attainment area. It included a total of four episodes, two of which were also used by US EPA in their HDE modeling. The control scenario used for the LADCO modeling also included all known controls to be effective in 2007. Since this modeling was performed before the Heavy Duty Engine rule was proposed, it is similar to the HDE 2007 Base run. The modeling results, performed to conform to US EPA's " Draft Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS", May 1999, modeled a base design value for the Michigan City site of 101 ppb. From that base, the projected design value for 2007 with controls in place was modeled at 89 ppb. The resulting RRF ( 89 ppb/ 101 ppb) is 0.8811. Applying the RRF to the current design value of 93 ppb results in a projected value in 2007 of 82 ppb. May 2, 2001 0 8 Hour Ozone Assessment The purpose of this document is to summarize the results of USEPA's modeled 8 hour ozone attainment test for the recent LADCO subregional modeling. These results provide information about the amount of control needed to provide for attainment of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS in the Lake Michigan region and in other cities in the modeling domain ( i. e., Indianapolis, Evansville, Louisville, St. Louis, and Detroit).

Comment: The LADCO subregional modeling was designed to assess 1 hour ozone and, as such, there are some limitations with using it to assess 8 hour ozone. For example, the episodes and modeling domain were selected for the Lake Michigan region and may not accurately represent other cities in the modeling domain, such as St. Louis and Detroit. On the other hand, it should be noted that three of the four modeled episodes are representative periods for high 8 hour ozone and basecase model performance for 8 hour ozone was found to be as good as ( or better than) that for 1 hour ozone.

Modeling Runs The subregional modeling consisted of applying UAM V for four episodes over Grid M ( see " Midwest Subregional Modeling: 1 Hour Attainment Demonstration for Lake Michigan Area", September 27, 2000). The four episodes are as follows:

June 22  28, 1991 June 13  25, 1995 July 14  21, 1991 July 7  18, 1995 The following modeling runs were examined here:

SR1a CAA controls SR81 CAA controls + 0.25 utilities + 0.25 utilities + Tier II/ Low S ( IL, IN, WI) ( KY, MO, TN) SR12( SIP Call) CAA controls + 0.15 utilities + SIP Call non utilities + Tier II/ Low S SR12a SR12 w/  25% utility NOx SR12b SR12 w/  25% VOC ( Lake Michigan area)

SR16 SR12 w/ some new changes2 1 MI @ final State rule for utilities ( 0.25) and non utilities May 2, 2001 1 SR16voc SR16 w/  30% anthropogenic ( elevated and low level) VOC domainwide SR16nox SR16 w/  30% anthropogenic ( elevated and low level) NOx domainwide 2 WI @ final State rule ( 0.28 utilities in 8 counties), CO credits, 13 TVA units @ 0.15, IC engines @ CAA, higher VMT growth for WI, diesel S rule, NOx I/ M cut points in WI, corrected VMT for IL, updated MOBILE5b inputs for IL and WI, and updated CAA boundary conditions. The domainwide anthropogenic emissions for these scenarios are as follows:

VOC NOx ( TPD) ( TPD) SR1a 10153 12993 SR8 10059 10955 SR12 10059 9381 SR12a 10059 8911 SR12b 9709 9381 SR16 10072 9626 SR16voc 7050 9626 SR16nox 10072 6738 SR16 most closely matches the final 1 hour regional control strategy. Because this run did not show attainment of the 8 hour NAAQS ( as discussed below), two additional sensitivity runs were performed to assess the effect of greater emission reductions.

Attainment Test USEPA's 8 hour ozone guidance specifies a relative attainment test which uses monitored design values in concert with model generated data (" Draft Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS", May 1999). The modeling is used to generate site specific " relative reduction factors" ( RRFs). Future year ozone design values are estimated at existing monitoring sites by multiplying the base year observed design value at each monitor by the corresponding RRF. The resulting future year design values are then compared to the ambient standard. If all such future year design values are < 84 ppb, then the attainment test is passed. 0 The base year design values were based on the average of the design values for the three 3 year periods which include the 1996 modeling inventory year ( i. e., 1994 1996, 1995 1997, and 1996 1998). 3 The RRFs for each monitor location were calculated as the ratio of the model predicted future year daily maximum 8 hour concentration ( averaged over several modeling days) to the model predicted base year daily maximum 8 hour concentration ( averaged over the same modeling days). In accordance with the guidance, only those modeling days with base year daily maximum 8 hour concentrations > 70 ppb at that location were considered here. The purpose of this threshold is to avoid overestimating the future year design values by excluding those situations when " meteorological conditions may not be similar to those leading to high concentrations ( i. e., near the site specific design value) at a particular monitor". 4 USEPA's guidance includes an additional " improvement" requirement for unmonitored areas with substantially higher modeled ozone concentrations than in the vicinity of any monitor ( e. g., over Lake Michigan). Specifically, the RRF for these high modeled, unmonitored areas multiplied by the area wide maximum observed design value must be less than the NAAQS. In other words, the improvement at these locations must be as great as that needed to bring the highest monitoring site into attainment. To address this requirement, a " ghost" monitor over Lake Michigan was included in the analysis.

Results Tables 1 and 2 present the future year design values for select sites ( i. e., those sites with an average design value > 85 ppb) in the Lake Michigan area and other cities in the modeling domain ( i. e., Indianapolis, Evansville, Louisville, St. Louis, and Detroit), respectively. The number of sites above the NAAQS and the " degree of violation" violation" 5 for each strategy are summarized below:

Base SR1a SR8 SR12 SR12a SR12b SR16 SR16voc SR16nox Number of Sites > NAAQS Lake Michigan Area 40 25 19 16 12 11 6 4 0 Indianapolis 9 6 4 3 3 3 2 0 0 Evansville 6 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Louisville 7 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Another way of specifying the base year design value is to use the higher of the design value from the 3 year period " straddling" the 1996 modeling inventory year ( 1995  1997) or the current 3 year period ( 1998  2000). This alternative approach, which is described in USEPA's guidance, results in slightly higher base year design values for sites in the Lake Michigan region ( by about 1  3 ppb), and, interestingly, slightly lower base year design values for sites in the other cities ( by about 1  3 ppb). Further discussion is needed on which approach to use for specifying the base year design value.

4 Another way of dealing with this situation is to consider only those days based on wind directions ( i. e., conditions associated with source receptor relationships responsible for higher ozone concentrations). Based on an analysis performed by Illinois EPA, the appropriate days to consider are as follows:

WI IN MI 6/ 26/ 91 6/ 26 28/ 91 7/ 20/ 91 7/ 18/ 91 7/ 16 20/ 91 7/ 12 13/ 95 7/ 12 15/ 95 7/ 12 14/ 95 The RRFs were recalculated for just these days for a couple of high monitors ( i. e., Pleasant Prairie and Michigan City) and resulted in slightly lower future year design values. ( Note, Table 1 reflects RRFs based on all modeling days > 70 ppb.) Further discussion is needed on whether to use this " select day" approach or the " 70 ppb threshold" approach in calculating the RRFs.

5 The " degree of violation" is the sum over all monitors of the difference between the design value and 84 ppb. 1 St. Louis 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 Detroit 5 4 4 4 4 4 2 0 0 Degree of Violation Lake Michigan Area 241 106 66 46 35 33 15 11 0 Indianapolis 65 30 22 1 11 13 3 0 0 Evansville 46 23 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Louisville 40 19 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 St. Louis 62 8 6 5 4 5 1 0 0 Detroit 27 11 8 6 5 5 2 0 0 Summary Based on the results of this analysis, several findings should be noted:

  CAA controls are not sufficient to demonstrate attainment of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS in the Lake Michigan area and other Midwestern cities ( i. e., Indianapolis, Evansville, Louisville, St. Louis, and Detroit)

  In the Lake Michigan area, the final 1 hour regional control strategy ( i. e., SR16, which includes the NOx SIP Call) will get us close to compliance with the 8 hour NAAQS, but additional control will be needed. In some other Midwestern cities ( i. e., Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Detroit), SIP Call controls also will not be enough to provide for attainment of the 8 hour NAAQS. ( These controls may, however, be sufficient in Evansville and Louisville.)

  An additional reduction in anthropogenic NOx emissions ( on the order of 30% beyond SR16) appears to be sufficient to provide for attainment of the 8 hour NAAQS in the Lake Michigan area and other Midwestern cities ( i. e., Indianapolis, St. Louis, and Detroit).

Note: Consistent with the " comment" noted above, these findings should be considered preliminary and subject to change. Further analyses ( with, possibly, a different photochemical model, different or additional episodes, and improved emissions inventories) are needed to establish a formal attainment demonstration for the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. 0 Table 1. Future Year Design Values for Lake Michigan Area SITE Base SR1a SR8 SR12 SR12a SR12b SR16 SR16voc SR16nox Pleasant Prairie 95 94 91 90 90 89 88 86 82 Kenosha 85 83 81 81 80 80 79 77 73 Racine 90 87 86 85 85 84 83 81 77 S. Milwaukee 91 87 85 84 84 84 82 80 74 Milwaukee Alverno 85 81 80 79 78 78 76 75 69 Milwaukee UWMN 85 81 81 80 80 79 77 75 71 Milwaukee Bayside 93 89 88 87 86 86 84 83 77 Grafton 92 88 87 86 85 85 83 82 75 Harrington Beach 93 90 89 87 87 86 85 84 78 Sheboygan 91 88 86 85 84 84 83 81 76 Manitowoc 95 91 89 88 88 87 86 84 78 Kewaunee 91 87 85 84 83 83 81 80 73 Newport Beach 92 87 85 84 83 83 81 80 73 Waukegan 85 82 81 80 80 80 78 77 72 Northbrook 85 85 84 84 84 83 81 80 76 Des Plaines 85 86 85 85 84 84 81 80 78 Evanston 87 85 84 84 83 83 81 80 77 Chicago SWFP 88 84 82 82 82 82 79 78 73 Chicago Jardine 86 83 82 81 81 80 79 77 73 Hammond 93 87 85 85 84 84 82 81 74 Gary IITRI 92 86 84 84 83 83 81 80 73 Ogden Dunes 94 88 86 85 85 85 83 82 74 National Lakeshore 90 85 83 82 81 82 79 78 71 Michigan City 101 95 93 92 90 91 89 88 80 Laporte 89 83 82 81 80 80 78 77 70 Lowell 87 81 80 79 78 79 76 76 69 Valparaiso 86 81 79 78 77 78 76 75 68 Potato Creek 90 86 84 82 81 82 78 78 68 South Bend 88 84 81 79 79 79 77 76 70 Granger 90 86 84 82 81 82 78 78 69 Bristol 87 83 81 80 79 79 76 76 67 Frankfort 87 84 82 81 81 80 79 78 73 Scottville 93 89 88 86 86 85 84 82 77 Muskegon 97 92 90 89 88 88 86 85 79 Holland 96 90 89 87 86 87 84 83 76 Grand Rapids 85 80 79 78 77 77 74 73 68 Evans 87 83 81 80 80 80 77 76 69 Coloma 96 90 88 87 86 87 83 82 74 Cassopolis 93 88 86 85 84 84 81 80 71 Kalamazoo 85 81 79 78 77 77 73 72 65 Over Lake 101 96 94 93 93 92 90 88 83 0 Table 2. Future Year Design Values for Other Cities in Modeling Domain Base SR1a SR8 SR12 SR12a SR12b SR16 SR16voc SR16nox INDIANAPOLIS Marion County Harrison 95 91 90 88 88 88 85 82 77 Marion County MannRoad 89 84 81 78 77 78 75 74 68 Marion County Harding 90 86 84 83 82 83 79 77 73 Marion County NAC 89 86 84 83 82 83 80 77 72 Johnson Conty Trafalgar 85 80 77 75 74 75 72 71 65 Morgan County Monrovia 88 83 80 77 76 77 74 73 67 Hamilton County Noblesville 98 93 91 90 89 90 87 84 78 Hancock County Fortville 95 91 89 87 86 87 84 82 76 Madison County Emporia 92 87 85 82 82 82 80 79 70 EVANSVILLE Posey County St. Phillips 88 84 80 76 75 76 74 74 64 Vanderburgh County Scott 93 89 85 80 79 80 78 78 67 Vanderburgh County Evansville 92 88 84 80 79 80 77 77 67 Warrick County Yankeetown 94 90 84 79 78 79 76 76 65 Warrick County  Booneville 91 88 82 77 75 77 74 74 64 Warrick County  Tecumseh 92 88 83 79 78 79 77 76 66 LOUISVILLE Clark County Charlestown 93 89 87 84 84 84 81 79 72 Floyd County New Albany 91 89 87 84 83 84 81 78 72 Bullitt County Shepherdstown 86 80 78 75 74 75 71 71 62 Jefferson County WLKY 91 87 86 84 83 84 80 78 73 Jefferson County  Bardstown 88 87 84 82 82 82 78 76 72 Jefferson County  Watson 90 86 84 82 80 82 77 76 68 Oldham County Buckner 89 85 81 79 78 79 76 75 67 ST. LOUIS Madison County Alton 90 82 80 80 79 80 74 73 66 Madison County  Maryville 87 82 79 78 77 78 75 74 67 Madison County  Edwardsville 88 81 80 79 78 79 75 74 67 Madison County  Wood River 88 81 80 79 78 79 75 74 67 Jefferson County Arnold 91 84 81 79 78 79 76 75 66 St Charles County W. Alton 100 92 90 89 88 89 85 83 76 St Charles County Orchard 93 84 82 81 80 81 76 75 68 St Genevieve County BonTerre 86 79 75 73 73 73 70 70 62 St. Louis County Ferguson 88 82 81 80 79 80 76 74 70 St. Louis County  Affton 86 79 77 76 75 76 73 71 67 St. Louis County  Queeny Park 85 79 78 77 77 77 74 72 68 St. Louis County  Clayton 85 80 78 77 77 77 74 72 68 St. Louis County  St. Ann 87 81 80 79 78 79 75 73 69 DETROIT Wayne County E 7mile 89 87 86 85 85 85 82 80 79 Macomb County New Haven 92 87 87 86 86 86 85 83 81 Macomb County Warren 88 86 85 85 85 85 81 79 77 St. Clair County Algonac 92 87 86 86 85 85 85 83 80 St. Clair County  Port Huron 86 81 80 80 80 80 79 77 73 1


 G       "   '  ' "      G ' 7 '  @     ' $ ) ) + '         *  # *  # 3   *   5 3    * 4 + )  ' (    #  $       1           $   % %                    - %                     !  $ - D    3            " "   $   %   ( 0  0     %   "  #        D            , %          $

       "  D ' # ' "   3 ' @ '       	   "  # ' 6 '  C 	      "  7 '  2

    "       '  2       '  $ ) ) + '       *  # *  # 3   *   5 3    * 4 + (  '   9 ;   ' U. S. Antarctic Marine Living Resources AMLR 2000/ 2001 Field Season Report. Lipsky, J. D. ( ed.). 2001. ( NOAA TMNMFS SWFSC 314). 192 p. ( NTIS No. PB2002 102281).

&

 #    %    !       !  " "        ,        "      9

         "  G ' 1 ' "  G '  @      "  D '  '  3

"  # ' # '  #    "     G '  @     '  $ ) ) + '       *  # *  # 3   *   5 3    * 4 + %  ' $ 9 )   '

  / $

    !

 *     : A A    '      '     '   ! A

 A

 '                 	   %                      (      %   " >          3  1      3           %

  G       "   ' 5 ' " # ' 6 '  2           "  5 '   '  ?     "  3 ' 5 '  5    	  E "   ' # '  ?       " ? ' G '  @

   "  D '

"      G ' G '  6    '   + 8 8 8 '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    * 4 %     $ 8 $   '          C @ 8 8 * + 0 ) 0 ; 8              	   %         ,     "    %   "  >       -    3  7     3  1      3           %

  #

   "  G ' # ' " 2 ' ? '  D    "  ? ' G '  @

   "  7 '      "   ' G '   	     	    "   '  ' 5  	    	    "  5 '   '  ?     "  3 ' 5 '  5    	  E "  D '

"    '  '

"      2 '   '  5      '   + 8 8 9 '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    *  4 (     0 0 4   '          C @ 8 9 * + $ 9 0 % 4  '             	   %  #    %    +  ,  3  #    %        3     >     $   #      ,  %   "  #           3  >

?         "  2 ' ? ' "  6 ' 5 '       E "  @ ' @ '  #    	  "   '  '      	   "  5 '   '  ?     "   '  '  @  	     "      2 ' 7 '  #      ' $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    * 0 0   $ % (   '   )  ( 7  #  9    -   6 6 : 9 *

=

      "    #                           $   % .             $       %       &

  #  .

"  C ' "  # ' 6 ' 2           "  # ' G '  3    "   '  '  5  	    	    "      . ' C ' @ ,         '   $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    * 0 $  0 0 4   '          C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) ; 8 ) (  '             	   %  #    %    +           #           3 >

        "  6 '  ' "  2 ' ? '  ?         "  5 ' 6 '       E " @ ' @ '  #    	  "  7 ' # '  1   7     	  "   '  '  @  	     "      2 ' 7 ' #      '  $ ) ) + '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    * 0 (   + % (  '         C @ $ ) ) + * + ) ( ( ; +

            	   %             , %    3  E

  ,     , - %    3         	      , %        #           3  >    -

       "  6 '  ' "  @ '  @ '  #    	  "  2 '  7 '  1      "   '   ' @  	     "  5 '  6 '       E "   '   '  G       "      2 ' 7 '  #      ' $ ) ) + '        *  # *  # 3   *  5 3    *  0 ;   + ( 9   '         C @  $ ) ) + * + ) ( ( ( 8  '

4     !

 *     : A A    '     '     '   ! A C

 	    	    A

 	    	    '                   -

          $    %                   )

         ,  3  D         D   $          9    '         "  G '   ' "  5 '  C '

   "   '  2 '        	  "     D '  5 '  C 	      '   $ ) ) + '       *  # *  3    * + $ $  '   ( $   '          '  C @ $ ) ) + * + ) % $ % %  '     ,   !       !  " "        ,        "     3  9

3       "  2 '   ' "  6 	   "  7 '  C '  7  #      "  C '    '  6 	   "  # '  # ' #    "       '   '      E '   $ ) ) ) '       *  # *  3    * + + 8  '   + 8 +  '            '  C @ $ ) ) + * + ) $ ) + (  '       3          3      0        "           %  /          D         2

$  0   -            "   $ 3  #           3  >          3  %   "     6        6

@

"  # '    ' "   '   ' #        "      D '   '  #  	  '   $ ) ) ) '

   6        & %     &           #          -       5   &

'   % - -     5     *

 6 6      *

        7  8 ( 9 8         3 % -    %

    #    -  '  .   ( ( : ; :  /

  *  < ) = 6 ; ) 8 6 ; ) ) )  0 : 6 9 ) ) 6 8 8 = 6 ; 9 > < 1 	  2 *  < ) = 6 ; ) 8 6 ; ? ) )

     *  &    * + + 5 5 5         #  "      *  # *  3    * + + +  '   4 ;   '            '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) 4 0 $ 0  ' 0                  '   %   %      ,

    "     	       $

  @  	   "   '   ' "      # '  6 '  #    	  '   $ ) ) + '        *  # *  3    * + $ +  '   $ 0 8   '            '  C @ $ ) ) + * + ) ( 4 $ 0  ' .     7           -    	        $   %  #    %      ,  3 !                    3   % %      #    %            %     &                          0       D   $ -       3

  5 	     "   '  7 ' "  # '   '  ?          "  D '       "  # ' 5 '           "       2 '  D 	     '   $ ) ) ) '       *  # *  3    * + + 9  '   + ) 4   '            '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) 9 0 9 $  ' 2     +

     %         " "        $  7 "        '      %              '   %   %      ,          3     < 3        :

  I    "  # *   ' "      # '  5 '        '   $ ) ) ) '      *  # *  3    * + + $  '   + % 0   '            '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) 4 0 ) 4  ' 2                       3

  2

    "  @ '  5 '      	     ' $ ) ) + '        *  # *  3    * + $ 4  '   ( $   '            ' C @ $ ) ) $ * + ) ) 0 + 9  ' 2         7              3

  2

   "  @ '  5 '     	     ' $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  3    * + + 4  '   + ) +   '            ' C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) 0 $ ( 9  ' '            , %       )             *   %      '

3

3

    %                #    %    1     3         .

     "  G ' 5 ' "  # '   ' @     "      7 '   '  @     '   $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  3    * + + %  '   0 %   '            '  C @ $ ) ) + * + ) ) % ( %  ' !

    2        '     . % %                 +

        $

  5 	   "  7 '   ' "      2 '   '  #

   	      '        *  # *  3    * + + ;  '   $ ) ) ) '   + ; 4   '          '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) 9 + ) ;  ' (    9     #    %    >            &                        (   	          $    %   '      %                  % % >          3  1      3            %        .    "        % 0

     3

       3      /          "

     "  2 '  2 '  $ ) ) + '       *  # *  3    * + $ )  '   $ 9 0   '          '  C @ $ ) ) + * + ) ( 4 $ %  ' (         #    %    >            &                        (   	        $   %  '      %                % % >          3  1      3           %        .    "       % 0

     3

       3      /          "     -

       "  2 '  2 '   $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  3    * + + (  '   $ 9 %  '            '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) ; ) ) 0  ' (         #    %    >                 "  (   	        $  %  '      %                .    "       %  0

 -     3

       3      /                  "     -

      "  3 '  2 ' "  # '  . '  5 	   	   "  D '   '  5

   "  # ' K 	         "      2 '  2 '       '   $ ) ) ) '        *  # *  3    * + + 0  '   + 4 9   '  M        	    '            '  C @ $ ) ) ) * + ) ( 0 + )  '

 	   	   !

           "

     #

             $

 %

    &  %    '      $

   $

(         %

  $

	           $

             $

     $

    	      	   )

    	       *

            +                              	       !    "

       ,

 -

 $

          	  (  #

  .

 %

 ,   !   #  . / 0 0 0

 #

(

      	   1

  	       #

   $

 ,

     #      $

      #       2  "

      3 # #

  $

	     $

                 $       3 # #  %

4

      4

          %

  $  "       #

  %

   & " # %  ' $

 4 	       5

 $

$

  %

 #

   & 4 5   % # ' $

       3 # #  4        (   -   3       %   	        &

        '

  $

     *

 $

 $

 $

 6  7

 $

 $

 8

	      8

   8

     8

(

          &        '  (    )

    	    *     	    *

       4

  8

         8

 .

           #

 #                +     '    ,      &

        #   -

       "

      9

    &   9 '

  $

	  	     $

 $  # :  $

  %

       9

  $                                	        9  #

	       -

	 ;                (

    '

       "

          	       %

   3

  "

 $  <

                $

  8

  8

  # %

   9

   8

               8

(

  3 # #                                    $

             $         $

   $

 $

 $

 $

 <

      (    <

         	  (

       $        $

                    $

  $

       5

/

  .      ! " #    $ #                   -

 " %

     F  C   ! 	     	        	          	      3           	 ! 	  	   	      	   :   	     	           	    "

     	   "   	     	           	    "  !                      	   "

                 	           	   A P      "     	                               	                         	   "

	            	                	       	 ! 	  	   "               	                                   	 !            '           2                          -

  %

     F  7

             /           "  	   	   "

      	   "          	        "       	 E   	   "           !       "           *   !      	    	  	                      '

 	    	    "               "

	    	    "

 	                C   	  	              	    	     "     	           "             "

	     "

     '     ,          -

%  ,

    F  C   ! 	     	        	       	  *                        	         "

     	   "               	     	                              '

 7  !          B        7 B   C       "    *              C       "   	     	           	                       ?       	    2          	        2      	   '          	              	 ! 	      3 	   	    B        3 B   C       "     	          "

	           !   	   "

  	    '     ,   2                          -

 %

     F  7

        	   	                              	 E

      	   "   	 ! 	  	    "                  	          3         	     	           	                   	                       5                  &  	            '  C   ! 	                      "

    "   3     B

 2      "     	                         "           	             "

 	    	     	    "

       	           "   	     "

 "            	           	    '      	            -

    F  C   ! 	     	        	              	   /      	 ! 	  	   "

	  	  	   '     	                      "               "                3        2

     	     	                   "

 	       	    "          "         	    "  .                	         	   	                  "

	          !   	   "

             	 ! 	  	   '      	     2                          -

 	 %

     	 %   -   "

  "   F  7  *

                  "  	      	                   !

*     	         	 P    H    	  *

E

            	    	   H

H        !

        	  	 E   	             	   '          	   "

 	    	    "

          "                /        *   *    *          *

                  '      	            -

    F  7

	  	  	              	         	   '                  3        2   	         	               "    	    	  	   "      P      '  C   ! 	     	        	        	     	       	   	   "            "                                         	       P      "                        !   	        	     	   	     	   '  G                             !

   	   "     	   "      	                     	    "     ' "

             	       	   '      	     2                          -          	 %

    F  7

             /           "   	   	   "

      	   "          	        "       	 E   	   "           !       "           *   !      	    	  	                       '

 	    	    "               "

	    	              "

 	                C   	  	              	    	     "     	           "             "

	     "

     '  1    #

     % %      -

    F                # 3            C      2             	                        	     !

 	  '

          	                                   	     	              3  Q "        *   	      ,      <  P '     '   ! '

   !       2

  .           	            ?      	       ,                              	           	                	      	  	    '        	           ?              C        	          ,

     3        ?  !                           	 !    	  	   '      ?     /   . -     	        !

              	        	           	           	   /    	     	              	                	     	        "   	              "            '             	                   "

       "        ! 	    	        	            ?         	 ! 	  	   : James D. Murray Michael Spranger, Extension Leader College Park, MD 20742 National Sea Grant Extension Leader Florida Sea Grant  Univ. of FL ( 301) 314 1280 FAX: 314 9091 National Sea Grant Office/ NOAA PO Box 110405 dlipton@ arec. umd. edu 1315 East West Highway, Room 11752 Gainesville, FL 32611 0405 Silver Spring, MD 20910 ( 352) 392 1837 x226 FAX: 392 5113 Clifford Goudey, Extension Leader ( 301) 713 2431 x152 FAX: 713 0799 msspranger@ mail. ifas. ufl. edu MIT Sea Grant  MASSACHUSETTS jim. d. murray@ noaa. gov Institute of Technology Keith W. Gates, Extension Leader Building E38 300/ Kendall Square Georgia Sea Grant  Univ. of GA 292 Main Street Rick Wallace, Extension Leader 715 Bay Street Cambridge, MA 02139 Alabama Sea Grant  Auburn Univ. Brunswick, GA 31520 4601 ( 617) 253 7079 FAX: 252 1615 Mississippi Alabama Sea Grant ( 912) 264 7268 FAX: 264 7312 cgoudey@ mit. edu 4170 Commander's Drive kgates@ arches. uga. edu Mobile, AL 36615 John D. Schwartz, Extension Leader ( 334) 438 5690 FAX: 438 5670 Richard Brock Michigan Sea Grant  MI State Univ.

rwallace@ acesag. auburn. edu Hawaii Sea Grant  Univ. of HI 334 Natural Resources Building 2525 Correa Road, HIG 232 East Lansing, MI 48824 1222 Donald E. Kramer, Extension Leader Honolulu, HI 96822 ( 517) 355 9637 FAX: 353 6496 Alaska Sea Grant  Univ. of AK ( 808) 956 8191 FAX: 956 2858 schwartj@ msue. msu. edu 2221 E. Northern Lights., # 110 Brockr@ Hawaii. edu Anchorage, AK 99508 4140 Jeffrey L. Gunderson, Extension Leader ( 907) 274 9691 FAX: 277 5242 Brian Miller, Extension Leader Minnesota Sea Grant  Univ. of MN.

fndek@ uaa. alaska. edu Illinois Indiana Sea Grant Purdue Univ. 2305 E. 5th Street 1200 Forest Products Building Duluth, MN 55812 Paul Olin, Interim Extension Leader West Lafayette, IN 47907 ( 218) 726 8715 FAX: 726 6556 California Sea Grant College Program ( 765) 494 3573 FAX: 496 6026 jgunder1@ d. umn. edu University of California bmiller@ fnr. purdue. edu 2604 Ventura Avenue, Room 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Michael M. Liffman, Extension Leader David C. Veal, Extension Leader ( 707) 565 2621 FAX: 565 2623 Louisiana Sea Grant  LA State Univ. Mississippi Sea Grant Extension pgolin@ ucdavis. edu 234 Sea Grant Building Mississippi Alabama Sea Grant Baton Rouge, LA 70803 7507 Mississippi State University Nancy C. Balcom, Extension Leader ( 225) 578 6290 FAX: 578 6331 2710 Beach Blvd., Suite 1 E Connecticut Sea Grant  Univ. of CN mikelif@ lsu. edu Biloxi, MS 39531 1084 Shennecossett Road ( 228) 388 4710 FAX: 388 1375 Groton, CT 06340 6097 Paul Anderson, Extension Leader cdv@ ra. msstate. edu ( 860) 405 9107 FAX: 405 9109 Maine Sea Grant  Univ. of ME balcom@ uconnvm. uconn. edu 5715 Coburn Hall Orono, ME 04469 5715 Susan Halsey, Extension Leader James M. Falk, Extension Leader ( 207) 581 1422 FAX: 581 1426 New Jersey Sea Grant Delaware Sea Grant  Univ. of DE panderson@ maine. edu New Jersey Marine Science Consortium 700 Pilottown Road Building No. 22 Lewes, DE 19958 1298 Douglas Lipton, Extension Leader Fort Hancock, NJ 07732 ( 302) 645 4235 FAX: 645 4007 Maryland Sea Grant  Univ. of MD ( 732) 872 1300 x32 FAX: 291 4483 jfalk@ udel. edu 2200 Symons Hall shalsey@ njmsc. org

   !       2

  .    Dale R. Baker, Extension Leader Erie, PA 16563 Jurij Homziak, Extension Asst. Prof.

New York Sea Grant  Cornell Univ. ( 814) 898 6420 FAX: 898 6462 Vermont Sea Grant  Univ. of VT 340 Roberts Hall ecol@ psu. edu 317 Aiken Center Ithaca, NY 14853 5905 Burlington, VT 05405 ( 607) 255 2832 FAX: 255 2812 Ruperto Chaparro, Extension Leader ( 802) 656 0682 FAX: 656 0683 drb17@ cornell. edu Puerto Rico Sea Grant  Univ. of P. R. jurij. homziak@ uvm. edu PO Box 9011 Jack Thigpen, Extension Leader Mayaguez, PR 00681 9011 William D. DuPaul, Extension Leader North Carolina Sea Grant NC State Univ. ( 787) 832 8045 FAX: 265 2880 Virginia Sea Grant  VA. Institute P. O. Box 699 r_ chaparro@ rumac. uprm. edu of Marine Science Manteo, NC 27954 Gloucester Pt., VA 23062 ( 252) 441 3663 FAX: 441 7403 Ames B. Colt, Extension Leader ( 804) 684 7163 FAX: 684 7161 jthigpen@ pinn. net Rhode Island Sea Grant  Univ. of RI dupaul@ vims. edu Narragansett Bay Campus Frank R. Lichtkoppler Coastal Institute Building Pete Granger Co Leader Extension Narragansett, RI 02882 Washington Sea Grant  Univ. of WA Ohio Sea Grant  OH State Univ. ( 401) 874 6800 FAX: 789 8340 Marine Advisory Services 99 East Erie Street acolt@ gso. uri. edu 3716 Brooklyn Avenue, NE Painesville, OH 44077 Seattle, Washington 98105 ( 440) 350 2582 FAX: 350 5928 Robert H. Bacon, Extension Leader ( 206) 685 9261 FAX: 685 0380 lichtkoppler. 1@ osu. edu South Carolina Sea Grant pgranger@ u. washington. edu 287 Meeting Street Fred L. Snyder, Co Leader Extension Charleston, SC 29401 Jim Hurley, Assistant Director for Ohio Sea Grant  OH State Univ. ( 843) 727 2075 FAX: 727 2080 Research and Outreach Camp Perry  Building 3, Room 12 Robert. Bacon@ scseagrant. org Wisconsin Sea Grant  Univ. of WI Port Clinton, OH 43452 Goodnight Hall, Floor 2 ( 419) 635 1022 FAX: 635 1022 Judith D. Lemus, Extension Leader 1975 Willow Drive snyder. 8@ osu. edu Southern California Sea Grant Madison, WI 53706 1103 Univ. of Southern CA  Univ. Park ( 608) 262 0645 FAX: 262 0591 Jay Rasmussen, Extension Leader Los Angeles, CA 90089 0373 hurley@ aqua. wisc. edu Oregon Sea Grant  OR State Univ. ( 213) 740 1965 FAX: 740 5936 2030 South Marine Science Drive jdlemus@ usc. edu Newport, OR 97365 5296 Dale F. Leavitt, Extension Leader ( 541) 867 0368 FAX: 867 0369 Ralph Rayburn, Extension Leader Woods Hole Sea Grant Program Jay. Rasmussen@ hmsc. orst. edu Texas Sea Grant  TX A& M Univ. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 2700 Earl Rudder Fwy South, Suite 1800 193 Oyster Pond Road, MS # 2 Eric C. Obert, Extension Leader College Station, TX 77845 Woods Hole, MA 02543 1525 Pennsylvania Sea Grant PA State Univ. ( 979) 845 7524 FAX: 845 7525 ( 508) 289 2997 FAX: 457 2172 Station Road ralphr@ unix. tamu. edu dleavitt@ whoi. edu PHONE: 401 874 6160  nsgd. gso. uri. edu NATIONAL SEA GRANT LIBRARY ( Clearinghouse for all Sea Grant Publications)

Pell Library, University of Rhode Island  Bay Campus Narragansett, HI 02882 $

  9     0  1 ! 1 &    # .   7 .

               	       	                	            "                                  	             '         #            "            	   	       "

            	  	       "        	       C   	  	         "                 "

   '       0 $  3 2 ; ) ; 9 $ "    ! '  $ 9 "  + 8 % % '    / 1 '  #  1 0 &   (

"

    "     	   "          "

 	                       	                    	  	  '  E &    & / ( &  .

         	        P    	        	    	      	   "

    	                  '  3    	    	    	     	 !

      	   "      	   "     * ! 	  	           	                  "                             '   P                  	    	                    	         !                       	           	     	       	         '   ( ( .  -   1  ( . 0  2 7  +  #  1 0 &   (

           	  	         !   	               	 -                       "     !   	   "            	      	     "

        	        	            	        -

     '  1  ( 3  1 ( + .

        	     	   	                 *

        "   '  ' "

   "    !

              (          '

   '   .  0 . 0  2 7  +  #  1 0 &   (

    	             	                       	             	            	       *    !       	 -           	  	                   "     !   	    "           	      	     '  @

       '   .  0 . 0   +  7 ! #

 C

    	   '

           "   	        	         	    	                         H                    	    "    	    "        "     ' "

    	        	             '  & ( ( .  2 / 4  2 7 / / . (

       	  *     	             	   ,

   	  '        	      '      . 0  2 7  + .  4  #  1 0 &   (

 3 	   "        	   "           P    	     	             	       "                	  *    "

                *     	  	 E   '

 	         	   "  !

   "                  '  #    "

          "

     *

                                    	     	  	    	     	          	  	   '   1 ! ! .    7  /  2 7  + .  !

    	   	 ! 	            	 !    	                 	            	     	 ! 	                        	             	          '   1   & ! # ( 7 1   1 2  . 0 7  / .  2 7  + .  4 #  1 0 &   (

 .

        	   "        	   "             P    	     	         *

      	 ! 	  	           	           &  	            ' .

  *

  	         !

     ,

  	   	           	    	  !

         '          	    	         & '   '        *

           	          	   "        	   "

    P    	         "   	     "      	                       -         -

     & '   '        3      '   1  ( 7  .  (  /   + . / 2  2 7  + .  4   . -  1 &    .

            	 !

    	                   !

              	          	    *

  "

        !    -

  	             	             '      #

      "                      P      "  P          "        	       *

"

"

"

 "

 "

    "      	         "             '   &  . 0  2 7  + .  4  #  1 0 &   (

 C            *    !

	   "   	    	   "      	   "         	   H     	      	          "     E   "  	     	     "            	 E        *     '  7

         	  *

	   H  	                                                   !

	        "

 	       	    ! 	                      !   	 !        	    H             *

	           	   ' 0 . 2 /  ( . 0  =  / & .

              !                  	     	                            	        ?     7      	   C             	  	   C  	    7        '

          	   	    -  	   + 8 9 % ' . 0 7  / .  > . 7 ' + (

       	                  	     -     	 !

    "       "     ' . . I

      & '   '  . -     	 !   .      	   K    ' . /   7  1

   	                       	                  . P      	    C   	  	              	    	     !     !

	        $ * + )

    '  .    	        	  	            	          * $

  9       	                                 	      	                     	     *

            	     	           	   '            	  	      -                        & '   '  C   	  	        '        	  	            	              !

        	   "  .    	                                     "

  	    "       	     	        	           	    ' . &  1 # .    &  7 1

      	  "  @    	          - *

    "  7       "  3        2

 	      ?

" 3 	      "  ?      "  3      "         "

"             " C        "      	  "         "      &  	     D 	      ' . J # 1  (  =  / & .

     !

 P  	 !           '  '  '              	      	    !             & '   '          -     "

                    	      	   "  	      	   	          	    "  	         "                    	         	      	                	          	         & '   '          -       	   '      !       -                       	   "     	    "  	         "                            *

                 -       	   ' . J # 1  (   > . 7 ' + (

       	        	   	 ! 	          *          -       "  	 '  ' "   	      "        "       "

      '     '

          	           	      *  -           ' . J = .   . /  #  7   .

 C  	        	 !

        !           	   "        	   "             P    	                	     ' 2 7  +   / 1   H

 2

             E

      	           	          	                	           	   ' #

             E

           	        	   ' 2 7  +  2 7 / / . (

      	         	              	       	           !         	     "

   '  #

           !

       H

        N

         	      ' O 2 7  +  ! .  /

    	   *

     	   "       	   "

	   "        	   	     	            	   ' 2 7  +  1 7 /

     	    -

  	       	 !      	 !     	        	           	           H

            	                	   ' 2 7  +  # 1  ( 7 1

     	       	 E    	      	           4 A 9

 	     	             	              '

    ' 2 7  +    1 / &  / .

        *

           	                	   '  3

             ( )             	                    N    *

   ' O 2 7  +   ( .  H

        *     	      	                             	   '

    4 A 0        	       	   ' 2 7  +   ( 7   H

        	           	   	                  4 A 0                               + * + A $          	                 	     	                   	                   -            	     	   '

    ' 2 7  + .  4  !    ' . ! .  (  # /    ) 2 ! # *

         !

   2   	      3

 #               	  "

                        	   	            "

          	       & '   ' . . K                  # 3  #    #             ' 2 7  + 7  '      2 ( 3    1 ! ! .    7  /

 @         !                	         	     	   "        	   "            P    	                	              ' 2 & / / - ( 7 ! .    1 ! ! .    7  /  2 7  + .  !

   	   	 ! 	              	 !              ( )              	                	                   	     	   	       	 ! 	  	   "  	      * 	            	 !

"          !           	         *  	   	   ' '  1 &  0 2 7  +

 @

"   	                                           '           	            	    !

       	     "       	     "           	     '  6    !   "   # 3        	                   	                   '     N 3 	     * 	           &  	            " O               	                 	       	   * *       	       C   	  	  :     "      "             "            H      H             ' 7 ! # 1  (  =  / & .

 1

    & '   '              ! 	          	              	          + 8 4 ) "            '

            	          !     "              !     "      	         	      	   "     '

              !

"                -        & '   '  	          	   "     	    "  	         "

 	   	                	          &  	            ' 7 ! # 1  (   > . 7 ' + (

       	         	   	 ! 	          *             	 !   "  	 '  ' "   	      "        "       "        "     ' 7  0 &  (  7  /  2 7  + .  4  #  1 0 &   (

          *              	   "        	   "            P

       '       	           	                         "   	        "   	    	   "

   "               "                   P    	    	       	   "            ' $

  9 9 7  ( .    /  >  ( .   #  1   .   7  '  ) 7 > #  *

         	    	     	          	    !       	         	 E

      !                         	 !                	    	      	                          '      #

      	               -

    	           	           	    	        	           ' D 1 7  (  = .  ( &  .

          	          	 E             # 3  #    #              	     	          	    !      	         	 E           	 !    	         & '   '   	         	      & '   '  . . K '       	        	 !             & '   '  !                      & '   '     !    ' /   0 7  '  3    1 ! ! .    7  /

 B     	  	        	   "       	   "             P

                     '

  	                   	 !      	                  	    '

       	 !  *

  	    -

            *            *

  	  ' #

         	                "

                     "                     '  7

 	               *

  	  ' !  '  &  1  -  ( . = .    2 7  + .  4    1   .  - =  ( 7 1     0  !    ' . ! .  (     ( 3  C

 	      8 0 * $ ; ( "            '      #        *     !           ! 	          	                            !

	      I

  	              	 E                  	             	   /

          '

 	          & '   ' . -     	 !   .      	    K      . . K

     3  K  * 3

       !   	    K                                	             	         	    	     	       C # C      3 # C  '  5 	   	       & '   '  . . K "      &  	                 -     	 !

  !     	         	     	  *  	   "          "             "                            	     	                	                  	"

	    "

     	            '      #               ! 	              -     	 !

 *

        & '   '  . . K

                        	   "   -

     	       	   /

       !   	    E              P  	 !       "         -                         E     	         	 E

     &  	           ' !   7  .   .    .  ( 7 1   /  2 7  + 7  '

 3 	   	               "           "      -   	   "                 *  	   ' !   7  .   .    .  ( 7 1   /     (   +

 B     	  	       	   	   "        	   "             	 ! 	     P    	        	          "

             "

    	          	       	        ' !   7  .   .    .  ( 7 1   /  2 7  + .  ! .

           	              '

                 	   "

                        	            '    	     	  	  	    	        	        # 3    #   	    2       	     3

      	   	        !

"      	       	                        # 3

                      *         	   ' !  J 7 ! & !   &  (  7    / .  4 7 . / 0  ) !  4 *

#   I

                    - 	   	      ! 	               	  	    '         	    	       #   I "

      	    	  	   	        	     !

  "

 	         !

	    ' ! . (  7    ( 1

                	      P        + " ) ) )  	        "  ) ' 8 9 0           "  + ' + ) $ 4            "     $ " $ ) 0 ' ;       ' ! 1 ( 1   1  (

        *   	 !           	     	   	           !

              (          "

           ?     '       N

   "      O '  1  ( + > .  (   ( /   ( 7    2 7  + .  7 .   1  - '   7 I  ( 7 1   )   2 1 *

   	      !    	   "          	           G

 + "  + 8 % 8 "               3 '    3     ! 	                     	          	           	    	  	               	  !

         	  	                  	    /

 ,   	   	   	    	                      	  "

 *         3

 ,   	   	   	   ' 1 # ( 7 ! & !  4 7 . / 0  ) 1 4 *

        # 3  #   #             "   I

"  	                  	          +    	       ! 	                 !

    	          &  	            "   	        	   *                              	               	        *       	  	   H       $

  	       -

"        	 *

     !           	    "        	  "        	          ' $

  9 < #   ( - ( 7 ! .    1 ! ! .    7  /  2 7  + .  !

   	   	 ! 	              	 !              ( )              	                	                   	     	   	       	 ! 	  	   ' # .      # 7 (     1   & ! # ( 7 1

          	       &  	              	 !

           	 ! 	  	           	   '             	                  	           	   "     	               	 ! 	  	       	            *  	           &  	                G

 +

            '          	                                     	      *      "     	    C * $ ( "

     & '   '  @                   ' # .      # 7 (   &  .

         "

  "  	       &  	              	 !

                  	           &  	            ' #  . / 7 ! 7    4  2 7  + .  4  !    ' . ! .  ( # /    ) # ! # *

                       C # C       !          	       	     	      	        &  	                       ?  !    	            	      3

      *       ?  3

    3 # C '    C # C

    3 # C                       	   	           '    C # C

       	     	   	   '  . - . J # 1  (

 2  *  -                 	  	      	     !               & '   '

  P

 -

 	        '  . (  7 /  #  7   .

                           	          '  1 &  0  ) / 7 = . *  > . 7 ' + (

       	         	   "       	   "            P    	                	                            H                         	              '

 	    	   	       "  	                       "

                           "

       & '   '

       	                 '  &  7 ! 7

 #

                  !

    "   	       "

*         "       	 -

            "                  A

	    "                E           	   ' ( 1 (  /   / / 1 >   / .  / . = . /  1 2  2 1  . 7 '  2 7  + 7  '  ) (  / 2 2 *

        3 3 "

"

,             -     	 !

        &  	            "

     * !

 !               &  	            "

   ! 	  	            # 3  #  ' &

 . J   / &  7 = .  .   1  1 ! 7    I 1  .  ) . . I *

    #   3  #    #        *     !             	       	  E            	                  	    	               &  	                 -     	            $ ) )      	      	        *

    	           	            	    	        	          '

                    3  K  3

       !   	    K     ' &

- 2 /  '  = .   . /  /   0 7  '

              *

     & '   '   	   	    !                                                    	              	       ( )  &  	            '       	            	            	         "  & '   '      	    	   "         	    !        	       & '   '  3  K        ,  	    !                 '  & '   '

	    !                         	        	       	          	             	          & '   '      ' &

 ( .   7 ( 1  7  /   .

   E      -     	    4     	      	                                -        -           ?              3

	   4     	             8      	      	     &  .  1 2  2 7  + .  4  #  1 0 &   (

 .   	        	    *

         "

  "            *

  	   	          	          "   -      "

         "       	           & '   '      	    	   ' = .   . /

          	     	   	            !

   (                  '

     & '   '        ?            !

' > + 1 / .   / .  2 7  +    0   + . / / 2 7  + #  7   .

         	         	 !

                        "  	         "

 P     	  	   "

      '  '

'            '                %     &

  '  9 C AQUACULTURE Production 23 CLAMS Aquaculture, 23 Canned, 53 Exports, 68, 82 Frozen holdings, 58, 59 Imports, 61 ,82 Landings, 3, 12, 18, 82 Supply, 82 Value of landings, 3, 12, 18 COLD STORAGE Holdings, monthly, 56 59 CONSUMPTION Canned, 86 ,87 Cured, 86 Fillets and steaks, 87 Fresh and frozen, 86 Per capita, U. S., 86 Per capita, use, 90 Salmon, canned, 87 Sardines, canned, 87 Shellfish, canned, 87 Shrimp, 87 Sticks and portions, 87 Tuna, canned, 87 World, 88 CRABS Canned, 53, 80 Exports, 68, 73, 80 Frozen holdings, 58, 59 Imports, 61, 82 Landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 22 Supply, 80 Value of landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 22 World catch, 47 CRAFT, FISHING Number, by region and state, 94 DISPOSITION OF LANDINGS United States, 5 World, 49 EMPLOYMENT Processors and wholesalers, 95 Region and State, 95 EXPORTS All fishery products, 68 Crabs, 68, 73 Crabmeat, 68, 73 Continent and country, by, 70 Cured, 68 Edible, by years, 69 Fish meal, 68, 74, 84 Herring, 68 Nonedible, by years, 69 Oils, 68, 74, 84 Principal items, 68 Salmon, canned, 68, 72, 79 Salmon, whole or eviscerated, 68, 72 Sardines, canned, 68, 79 Shrimp, canned, 68, 83 Shrimp, domestic and foreign products ,71,83 Shrimp, fresh and frozen, 68, 71 Snow ( tanner) crab, 80 Value, by years, 69 Volume, by years, 69 World, by country, 49 FLOUNDERS Fillets, 52 Frozen holdings, 56, 57 Landings, 1, 8, 14 Value of landings, 1, 8, 14 GROUNDFISH FILLETS AND STEAKS Exports, 68 Fillets, supply, 77 Imports, 61, 77 HALIBUT Fillets and steaks, 52 Frozen holdings, 56, 57 Landings, 1, 9, 15 Value of landings, 1, 9, 15 HERRING, SEA Canned ( sardines), 53 Consumption ( sardines), per capita, 87 Landings, 1, 9, 15 Exports ( sardines), 68 Imports ( sardines), 61 Value of landings, 1, 9, 15 World catch, 47 IMPORTS All fishery products, 61, 62 Blocks and slabs, 61, 64 Clams, canned, 61 Continent and country, by, 63 Crabmeat, canned, fresh and frozen, 61, 80 Cured, 61 Edible, 61, 62, 63, 76, 77 Fillets, groundfish, 61, 64, 77 Fillets, other than groundfish and ocean perch, 61 Finfish, 69 Groundfish, 61, 64, 77 Herring, canned, 61 Industrial, 76, 77 Lobsters, canned, 61 Lobsters, fresh and frozen, 61 Meal and scrap, 61, 67 Nonedible, 61, 62, 63 Oils, 61, 84 Oysters, canned, 61 Principal items, 61 Quota, canned tuna, not in oil, 65 Salmon, canned, 61, 79 Salmon, fresh and frozen, 61 Sardines, canned, 61, 79 Scallop meats, 61, 82 Shellfish, 76 Shrimp, by country, 66 Shrimp, by products, 67 Tuna, canned, 61, 65, 79 Tuna, fresh and frozen, 61, 79 Value, by years, 62 Volume, by year, 62 World, by country, 49 INSPECTION Establishments and amount inspected, 96 LANDINGS Disposition, 5 Foreign shores, off, 8, 14 Human food ( edible), 5 Industrial, 5 Months, by, 5 Ports, major U. S., 7 Record year, by states, 6 Species, 1, 8, 14 State and region, current, 6                %     &

  '  9 6 LANDINGS Territory, 20 U. S. shores, distance from, 8, 14 World, 47, 48, 49 LOBSTERS, AMERICAN Imports, 61, 81 Landings, 4, 12, 18, 81 Supply, 81 Value of landings, 4, 12, 18 LOBSTER, SPINY Frozen holdings, 58, 59 Imports, 61, 81 Landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 22, 81 Supply, 81 Value of landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 81 MACKERELS Landings, 2, 9, 15, 20 Value of landings, 2, 9, 15, 20 World catch, 47 MAGNUSON FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT ( MFCMA) Fishery Management Plan, 97 General description, 97 Optimum yield by species, 100 Permits, foreign fishing, 97 Regional Fishery Management Councils, 99 MEAL AND SCRAP Exports, 68, 74 Imports, 61, 67 Production, U. S., 55 Supply, 83 World disposition, 49 MENHADEN Landings, 2, 9, 15 Value of landings, 2, 9, 15 OIL Exports, 68, 83 Imports, 61, 83 Production, 55 Supply, 83 World disposition, 49 OYSTERS Aquaculture, 23 Canned, 53 Imports, 61, 82 Landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 23 Supply, 82 Value of landings, 4, 12, 18, 21, 23 World catch, 47 PLANTS AND FIRMS Employment, 95 Processors and wholesalers, 95 PRICES, Exvessel index, 93 PROCESSING Animal food and bait, canned, 51, 54 Canned products, 53, 54, 68 Clams, canned, 53 Crabs, canned, 53, 80 Employment in, 95 Fillets and steaks, fresh and frozen, 52 Frozen holdings, 56  59 Industrial products, 55 Meal, oil, 51, 55 Oysters, canned, 53 Plants, number of, 95 Salmon canned, 53 Sardines, canned, 53 Shrimp, canned, 53 Sticks, portions, and breaded shrimp, 51 RECREATIONAL FISHERIES Harvest by species, 29 Harvest by species and by fishing mode, 32 Harvest by species and by distance from shore, 36 Harvest and live releases by year, 40 Harvest and live releases by state, 45 MRFSS, program description, 26 Number of anglers by state, 46 Number of fishing trips by state, 46 Statistical survey coverage, 28 Statistical data types/ definitions, 26 SALMON Aquaculture, 23 Canned, 53, 79 SALMON Consumption, per capita, 87 Exports, 68, 72 Fillets and steaks, 52 Frozen holdings, 56, 58 Imports, 61 Landings, 2, 10, 16 Supply, canned, 79 Value of landings, 2, 10, 16 World catch, 47 SARDINES Canned, 53, 79 Consumption, per capita, 87 Exports, 68, 79 Imports, 61, 68 Landings, 2, 10, 16 Supply, canned, 79 World catch, 47 SCALLOPS Exports, 68, 82 Imports, 61, 82 Landings, 4, 13, 19 Supply, 82 Value of landings, 4, 13, 19 World catch, 47 SHRIMP Aquaculture, 23 Breaded, 51 Canned, 53, 61, 83 Consumption, per capita, 87 Exports, 70, 71, 83 Frozen holdings, 58, 59 Imports, 61, 66, 67, 83 Landings, head off, 83 Landings, head on, 4, 13, 19, 21 Supply, canned, 83 Supply, total, 83 Value of landings, 4, 13, 19, 21 World catch, 47 SUPPLY All fishery products, 75, 76 Clam meats, 82 Crabs, 80 Crabmeat, 80 Edible fishery products, 75, 76 Fillets and steaks, all, 77 Fillets and steaks, groundfish, 77 Finfish, 76                %     &

  '  9 : SUPPLY Industrial Products, 75, 76 Lobster, American, 81 Lobster, spiny, 81 Meal, 84 Oil, 84 Oysters, 82 Salmon, canned, 79 Sardines, canned, 79 Scallop meats, 82 Shellfish, 76 Shrimp, 83 Tuna, 78 SWORDFISH Landings, 3, 11, 17, 22 Value of landings, 3, 11, 17, 22 TUNA Canned, 53, 61, 65, 79 Consumption, per capita, 88 TUNA Exports, 68 Fresh and Frozen, 78 Imports, 61, 65, 79 Landings, 3, 11, 17, 21, 22 Quota, imports, canned, 65 Supply, canned, 79 Value of landings, 3, 11, 17, 21,22 World catch, 47 USE Per capita, 90 Landings, by month, 5 Valued added, 91 WHITING Frozen holdings, 56, 57 Landings, 1, 9, 15 Value of landings, 1, 9, 15 WORLD FISHERIES Acquaculture, 47 Catch by countries, 48 Catch by major fishing areas, 48 Catch by species groups, 47 Catch by year, 47 Catch by water type, 47, 48 Consumption, 88 Disposition, 49 Imports and exports value, 49 	     % -              %  7       	   &   3            ( 7 1   /  2 7  + .  4  #  1 0 &   (   7   # .   ( 7 1   #  1 '   !

     & '   '  7                        &   7   "     	     #   	    3 	     	        ! 	   "                   	           	                	      	  	      	   "             !

         	       	                   *    *    !

  	  '    6    C *

        ! 	    	         !

  '      ! 	        !

             	        !                   	    	   "          	       	            	   "

     ! 	    "              	  	    	      ! 	    "

   "     	  	   "        	       	        	   '         	            	  	    	       ! 	          !

      	    	        	   & '   '      	    	            	               	   '          	 !      ! 	            ! 	     	       	          	   '         	            	  	    	       ! 	                 ! 	         	             -                '      &   7                   	    7 	 ! 	  	            ! 	     6    C     	  	   "         !         "  	           	      	       "      !   	  	    	       !

        	           	                                  	         	       	   3 7  /  6    C        $ +   3 2  C      + $ 4      + $ 0 )         	    N C

 C       	              	       3 	       3

 C        O    	        	            7

   + 9 "  + 8 8 % ' &  .    1 2  7   # .   ( 7 1    .  = 7   .

                  !

         	       	       ! 	    	        !             "            "

     "

      "      	     "          ! 	             "   -        "  	         "                  !

	           	                    '      & '   '  7                 	                         &   7

                	            	            '      &  0     # #  1 = . 0  / 7  (  1 2  2 7  +  .  (   / 7  + ! .  (     0  #  1 0 &   (  3

	 *

"     ! 	        	   	                        	  	                     	    &   7  ' &  0    7   # .   ( 7 1   !   H

                	             !

             	         '

       	     !

  	                	    	        !

                     	    7 	 ! 	  	        	              	                             	           	 !

  	   '  C

   	        &   7      	  	            !

 	        "           "

    ' K &   '   0 .   L  !   H

     & '   '  ? 2  7 .

                            	       	    	          !

 	        !       P

        - 	   	    & '   '                '      & '   '  ?             	   	                       	       	    P

"    	      	    	 E  "

   	                 "  	    -             	  	               	           !            ' K #  1   .   . 0  &  0 .   2 . 0 .   /  7   # .   ( 7 1  L  !   H

     C & 3

   	          	           !

      "

           	            !        	  	    	         	    	  '                	   	       C & 3

               N C          &      3               	   O

   P  	                            ' K / 1 (  7   # .   ( . 0 L  !   H

       &   7                                                 N

         O      N         C         	  	    	    O

   '                                         A

   4 ) " + 8 8 % '

    !

   	              !

     -

     &   7   C       ' K  . (  7 / L  !   H

                  P

"

                    	              !

 	        ' C    	  	       P

                N 2    	   #    O

     	 ! 	        &   7   6    C *

        !

 	                          	    	      ! 	              	               !      	   '  &                      	     	 !

      !

      "       "

          	 E

 &   7

         ' &  0    +      #  !   H

     &   7   6    C *

        ! 	    	    !

          	               	            *    *    !

  	  '

       !   "

 	         	                  P  	        '

 &   7  *

      	     	   6    C   	   	      	          P

A  	    	              '       	         	           	       P

       	  	    ! 	  	   '  @     	          	  	       	        	                                    	  "

 	           "

           	       	             "                            	      '      &   7             !

     6    C             N

     O     	   	    	                    !

                       6    C *

            '      6    C

                           - 	   	    	       	               '  .

 	             	    6    C            P

                 	     ,     	     	          	           	   "        	   "    	   *   *         	    "           ' 2 1   2 &  ( + .   7  2 1  !  ( 7 1  : &

 0      "      %     " "     3   1     ! 2     %     7           0         -  2   2 :  <  6  .    - >     +    	  $              3  ! 0  9     ) <   *  5  < - 9 < 6 6  ) 2  J   5  < -     * (     2       -    - C 9 9 - 9 5 6  7                    %

 " %

  "


[Federal Register: January 5, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 3)]
[Notices]
[Page 583-584]
[DOCID:fr05ja07-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. ICR-1218-0147 (2007)]

National Recognized Testing Laboratories (29 CFR 1910.7);
Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's Approval of
Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA requests comment concerning its request for an extension
of the information-collection requirements specified by its Regulation
on National Recognized Testing Laboratory (29 CFR 1910.7). The
Regulation specifies procedures that organizations must follow to apply
for, and to maintain, OSHA's recognition to test and certify equipment,
products, or material for workplace safety purposes.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent or received) by
March 6, 2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Fax: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer than
10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger or courier service:
You must submit three copies of your comments and attachments to the
OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. ICR-1218-0147(2007), U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger and
courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and the
Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m.-4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number for this ICR (OSHA Docket No. ICR-1218-0147(2007)). All
comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in
the public docket without change and may be made available onfnlline at
http://www.regulations.gov. For further information on submitting

comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at

the address above. All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index, however, some information (e.g.,

copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download
through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material,
are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You
may also contact Todd Owen at the address below to obtain a copy of the
ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Owen or Theda Kenney, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, Room N-3609, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information-
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimized, collection instruments are understandable, and OSHA's
estimate of the information-collection burden is correct. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of the 1970 (the Act) authorizes
information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for
enforcement of the Act or developing information regarding the causes
and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29
U.S.C. 657).
    A number of standards issued by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) contain requirements for equipment, products, or
materials. These standards often specify that employers use only
equipment, products, or material tested or approved by a nationally
recognized testing laboratory (NRTL); this requirement ensures that
employers use safe and efficacious equipment, products, or materials in
complying with the standards. Accordingly, OSHA promulgated the
regulation titled ``Definition and Requirements for a Nationally
Recognized Testing Laboratory'' (the Regulation). The Regulation
specifies procedures that organizations must follow to apply for, and
to maintain, OSHA's recognition to test and certify equipment,
products, or material for this purpose.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information-collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions to
protect employees, including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information-collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA proposes to extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB)
approval of the information-collection requirements specified by the
Standard on Nationally Recognized Testing

Laboratory. There is an 80 burden hour increase as a result of the
Agency performing additional annual on-site reviews at NRTL facilities.
The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice, and will include this summary in its request to OMB to extend
the approval of these information-collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently-approved information-
collection requirements.
    Title: Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (29 CFR 1910.7).
    OMB Number: 1218-0147.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit
institutions; State, local or tribal government; Federal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 67.
    Frequency of Recordkeeping: On occasion.
    Total Responses: 67.
    Average Time per Response: 160 hours for organization to prepare
initial recognition applications to 16 hours for an annual site visit.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1,340.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Sumissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document (1)
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for ICR (OSHA Docket No. ICR-1218-0147
(2007)). You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading
document files electronically. If, instead, you wish to mail additional
materials in reference to an electronic or fax submission, you must
submit them to the OSHA Docket Office (see ADDRESSES section). The
additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments by
name, date, and docket number so OSHA can attach them to your comments.
    Because of security-related procedures, the use of regular mail may
cause a significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information
about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger or courier service, please contact the OSHA
Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov.
 Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about

submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index, some information (e.g., copyrighted

material) is not publicly available to read or download through http://www.regulations.gov.
 All submissions, including copyrighted material,

are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit

comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's User Tips
link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials
not available through the Web site and for assistance in using the
Internet to locate docket submissions.
    Electronic copies of this Federal Register document are available
at http://www.regulations.gov. This document, as well as news releases

and other relevant information, also are available at OSHA's Web page
at http://www.osha.gov.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2002 (67 FR
65008).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on December 29, 2006.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.
 [FR Doc. E6-22619 Filed 1-4-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 178 (Monday, September 15, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 54927]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21816]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 870

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0650]

Cardiovascular Devices; Withdrawal of Proposed Rule of
Reclassification of External Pacemaker Pulse Generator Devices

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing the
proposed rule the Agency issued in the Federal Register of October 17,
2011. In that document, FDA proposed to reclassify the external
pacemaker pulse generator (EPPG) devices, a preamendments class III
device into class II (special controls). In response to the
requirements under the Food and Drug Administration Safety and
Innovation Act (FDASIA) and new information received during a panel
meeting, FDA is withdrawing the proposed rule and issuing a proposed
administrative order to reclassify EPPGs.

DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn on September 15, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hina Pinto, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1652, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background--Regulatory Authorities

    On October 17, 2011, FDA published in the Federal Register (76 FR
64223) a proposed rule proposing the reclassification of external
pacemaker pulse generator (EPPG) devices from class III to class II
with special controls. FDA identified special controls that the Agency
believed would provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness
for the device type. FDA considered EPPGs in accordance with the
reserved criteria and determined that the device type does require
premarket notification.
    On July 9, 2012, FDASIA was enacted. Section 608(a) of FDASIA (Pub.
L. 112-144) amended section 513(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360c(e)) changing the process
for reclassifying a device from rulemaking to an administrative order.
Subsequent to the publication of the proposed rule, FDASIA's amendments
to section 513 of the FD&C Act required FDA to hold a classification
panel (an FDA advisory committee) meeting on the classification of this
device. On September 11, 2013, a meeting of the Circulatory System
Devices Panel (the Panel) was held to discuss whether EPPG devices
should be reclassified or remain in class III (Ref. 1). There was Panel
consensus that EPPG devices did not fit the regulatory definition of a
class III device. Coupled with the rationale that special controls
could be established to reasonably demonstrate an assurance of safety
and effectiveness, the Panel recommended class II (special controls)
for EPPG when intended for cardiac rate control or prophylactic
arrhythmia prevention.

II. Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule

    FDA provided an opportunity for interested parties to comment on
the proposed rule for EPPG (76 FR 64223). FDA received three comments
to the docket in response to the 2011 proposed rule. These comments
were received and have been considered during the presentations to the
Panel and in developing the proposed order. In response to these
comments and findings at the Panel meeting, FDA is withdrawing the
proposed rule for these devices and is issuing a proposed
administrative order.

III. Proposed Reclassification

    Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is proposing
in an order to reclassify EPPG devices, currently a preamendments class
III device, into class II (special controls). FDA continues to review
the merits of the submissions for requests for reclassification that
meet the requirements under 21 CFR 860.123, submitted in response to
the proposed rule.

IV. Reference

    The following reference has been placed on display in the Division
of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630
Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov. (FDA has
verified the Web site address in this reference section, but we are not
responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web site after this
document publishes in the Federal Register.)
    1. The panel transcript and other meeting materials for the
September 11, 2013, Circulatory System Devices Panel are available on
FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/MedicalDevices/MedicalDevicesAdvisoryCommittee/CirculatorySystemDevicesPanel/ucm342357.htm.

    Dated: September 8, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-21816 Filed 9-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13756-13757]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05069]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0085]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mianus River, Greenwich, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Metro-North Bridge across the
Mianus River, mile 1.0 at Greenwich, Connecticut. This deviation is
necessary in order to complete required maintenance including
installation of new timber ties, miter rails, and steel repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 12:01 a.m. on March 27, 2017
through 12:01 a.m. on May 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, USCG-2017-0085 is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email James Moore, Bridge Management
Specialist, First District Bridge Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
212-514-4334, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The owner of the bridge, the Connecticut
Department of Transportation, requested a temporary deviation in order
to facilitate maintenance of the bridge including installation of
timber ties, miter rail replacement, and steel repairs.
    The Metro-North Bridge across the Mianus River, mile 1.0 at
Greenwich, Connecticut is a single-leaf bascule railroad bridge
offering mariners a vertical clearance of 20 feet at mean high water
and 27 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing
drawbridge operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.209.
    The temporary deviation will allow the owner of the Metro-North
Bridge to close the span for openings each week beginning 8 a.m. Monday
through 4 p.m. Friday from March 27, 2017 to May 8, 2017. The span will
open on signal from 4 p.m. Friday through 8 a.m. Monday, provided 24
hours advance notice is given. The regular operating schedule for the
span will be restored April 8, 2017 through April 11, 2017 in order to
accommodate a previously scheduled boating event.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed position may
do at anytime. The bridge will be able to open for emergencies. There
is no alternate route for vessels to pass.
    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through
our

Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: March 7, 2017.
C.J. Bisignano,
Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-05069 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P