[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76728-76729]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30971]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R07-OW-2010-0898; FRL-9236-7]

Notice of a Regional Project Waiver of Section 1605 (Buy
American) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)
to the Central Iowa Water Association

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is hereby granting a waiver of the Buy American
requirements of ARRA Section 1605 under the authority of Section
1605(b)(2) [manufactured goods are not produced in the United States in
sufficient and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory
quality] to the Central Iowa Water Association (CIWA) for the purchase
of ORION Water Meter Monitor with Leak Detection Indicator in-home
water meter monitors manufactured in Malaysia by Eastech, Inc., under
license from Badger Meter, Inc., located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This
is a project specific waiver and only applies to the use of the
specified product for the ARRA project being proposed. Any other ARRA
recipient that wishes to use the same product must apply for a separate
waiver based on project specific circumstances. The waiver applicant
states that the Badger in-home water meter monitors are the only
devices that are compatible with the water meter heads installed by the
CIWA. The Regional Administrator is making this determination based on
the review and recommendations of the Drinking Water State Revolving
Fund (DWSRF) staff. CIWA has provided sufficient documentation to
support their waiver request. The Assistant Administrator of the Office
of Administration and Resources Management has concurred on this
decision to make an exception to Section 1605 of ARRA.

DATES: Effective Date: November 30, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Simmons, Environmental
Engineer, Water Wetlands and Pesticides Division (WWPD), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101,
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with ARRA Section 1605(c), EPA
hereby provides notice that we are granting a project waiver of the
requirements of Section 1605(a) of Public Law 111-5, Buy American
requirements, to the Central Iowa Water Association for the purchase of
a non-domestically manufactured ORION Water Meter Monitor with Leak
Detection Indicator in-home water meter monitors manufactured in
Malaysia by Eastech, Inc., under license from Badger Meter, Inc.,
located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to meet CIWA's project specifications.
    Section 1605 of the ARRA requires that none of the appropriated
funds may be used for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or
repair of a public building or a public works project unless all of the
iron, steel, and manufactured goods used in the project is produced in
the United States, or unless a waiver is provided to the recipient by
the head of the appropriate agency, here the EPA. A waiver may be
provided if EPA determines that (1) applying these requirements would
be inconsistent with the public interest; (2) iron, steel, and the
relevant manufactured goods are not produced in the United States in
sufficient and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory
quality; or (3) inclusion of iron, steel, and the relevant manufactured
goods produced in the United States will increase the cost of the
overall project by more than 25 percent.
    The CIWA drinking water improvement project is proposing the use of
a non-domestically manufactured water meter monitor. This project will
improve efficiency and promote water conservation by providing
customers with a single meter reading platform and in-home monitoring
devices. Residential water meters have been supplied and utilized by
Sensus since the late 1970's. The current Sensus water meters are now
aged and obsolete. The Sensus meter technology has been discontinued
and an in home monitoring unit is not available for the North American
market.
    The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) staff has reviewed
this waiver request and has determined that the supporting
documentation provided by the CIWA establishes both a proper basis to
specify a particular manufactured good, and that there is no domestic
manufactured good currently available. The information provided is
sufficient to meet the following criteria listed under Section 1605(b)
of the ARRA and in the April 28, 2009 Memorandum: Iron, steel, and the
manufactured goods are not produced in the United States in sufficient
and reasonably available quantities and of a satisfactory quality.
    EPA has also evaluated CIWA's request to determine if its
submission is considered late or if it could be considered timely, as
per the OMB Guidance at CFR 176.120. EPA will generally regard waiver
requests with respect to components that were specified in the bid
solicitation or in a general/primary construction contract as ``late''
if submitted after the contract date. However, EPA could also determine
that a request be evaluated as timely, though made after the date that
the contract was signed, if the need for a waiver was not reasonably
foreseeable. If the need for a waiver is reasonably foreseeable, then
EPA could still apply discretion in these late cases as per the OMB
Guidance, which says ``the award official may deny the request.'' For
those waiver requests that do not have a reasonably unforeseeable basis
for lateness, but for which the waiver basis is valid and there is no
apparent gain by the ARRA recipient or loss on behalf of the
government, then EPA will still consider granting a waiver.
    In this case, CIWA's waiver request indicates that the Badger in-
home water meter monitors are the only devices compatible with the
Badger meter transmitter system and that no other water meter monitors
are capable of meeting satisfactory quality to meet the technical
specifications. The existing installed Sensus meter technology has been
discontinued and Sensus has indicated that an equivalent in home
monitoring unit is not available from Sensus for the North American
market at this time. CIWA was not informed that the water meter monitor
was not American made until the point of signing a final purchase
agreement, after the contract was signed. There is no

indication that CIWA failed to request a waiver in order to avoid the
requirements of the ARRA, particularly since there are no domestically
manufactured products available that meet the project specifications.
Therefore, EPA will consider CIWA's waiver request, a foreseeable late
request, as though it had been timely made since there is no gain by
CIWA and no loss by the government due to the late request.
    Furthermore, the purpose of the ARRA is to stimulate economic
recovery by funding current infrastructure construction, not to delay
projects that are ``shovel ready'' by requiring potential SRF eligible
recipients, such as the Central Iowa Water Association to revise their
design standards and specifications as well as their construction
schedule. There are no domestic manufacturers that can provide a
compatible water meter monitor that meets the specifications of this
drinking water improvement project. To delay this construction would
directly conflict with a fundamental economic purpose of ARRA, which is
to create or retain jobs.
    The April 28, 2009 EPA HQ Memorandum, ``Implementation of Buy
American provisions of Public Law 111-5, the `American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009' '' (``Memorandum''), defines reasonably
available quantity as ``the quantity of iron, steel, or relevant
manufactured good is available or will be available at the time needed
and place needed, and in the proper form or specification as specified
in the project plans and design.'' The same Memorandum defines
``satisfactory quality'' as ``the quality of steel, iron or
manufactured good specified in the project plans and designs.''
    The March 31, 2009 Delegation of Authority Memorandum provided
Regional Administrators with the temporary authority to issue
exceptions to Section 1605 of the ARRA within the geographic boundaries
of their respective regions and with respect to requests by individual
grant recipients.
    Having established both a proper basis to specify the particular
good required for this project and that this manufactured good was not
available from a producer in the United States, the CIWA is hereby
granted a waiver from the Buy American requirements of Section 1605(a)
of Public Law 111-5. This waiver permits use of ARRA funds for the
purchase of a non-domestic manufactured ORION Water Meter Monitors with
Leak Detection Indicator documented in the CIWA's waiver request
submittal dated June 24, 2010. This supplementary information
constitutes the detailed written justification required by Section
1605(c) for waivers based on a finding under subsection (b).

    Authority:  Public Law 111-5, section 1605.

    Dated: November 30, 2010.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2010-30971 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


45817 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 2003 / Notices FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Persons needing further information should contact Patricia Overmeyer of EPA's Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Mailcode 5105T, Washington, DC 20460, ( 202) 566   2774, or overmeyer. patricia@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, EPA is required to develop standards and practices for carrying out all appropriate inquiry. The Federal Advisory Committee meeting is for the purpose of negotiating the contents of a proposed regulation setting federal standards and practices for conducting all appropriate inquiry. At its meeting on September 9 and 10, 2003, the Committee will continue substantive deliberations on the proposed rulemaking including discussion of the criteria established by Congress in the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act amendments to CERCLA ( 101)( 35)( B)( iii). On the morning of September 9, 2003, there will be a presentation to the Committee on the administrative and analytical requirements that must be completed by the Agency when developing a proposed rule. All meetings of the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee are open to the public. There is no requirement for advance registration for members of the public who wish to attend or make comments at the meeting. Opportunity for the general public to address the Committee will be provided starting at 2: 30 p. m. on both September 9 and September 10, 2003.

Dated: July 28, 2003. Thomas P. Dunne, Associate Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. [ FR Doc. 03   19745 Filed 8   1   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7538   6]

Draft Brownfield Grants Guidelines AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) is holding a public meeting to discuss EPA's draft of the fiscal year 2004 Proposal Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund, and Cleanup Grants ( Brownfield Grants Guidelines). The purpose of the public meeting is for EPA's Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment to listen to the views of public stakeholders on the Agency's draft Brownfield Grants Guidelines. During the public meeting, EPA officials will discuss the draft Guidelines. EPA will make the draft Brownfield Grants Guidelines available to the public on the Agency's Web site at http:// www. epa. gov/ brownfields on August 25, 2003. Interested stakeholders and the public are encouraged to download and review the draft guidelines prior to the public meeting. DATES: The public meeting will be held from 10 a. m.   12 noon on September 8, 2003. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in Room 1153 EPA East Building at 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. Those parties that wish to submit written comments on the draft Brownfield Grants Guidelines must submit their comments to EPA no later than September 8, 2003. To ensure that EPA has adequate time to consider any written comments, the Agency encourages parties to submit their comments to the Agency in electronic format. Electronic comments may be submitted to EPA's Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment at bf. comments@ epa. gov. Parties wishing to submit their comments via the United States Postal Service should address their comments to: Ms. Becky Brooks, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment, MC   5105T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460. Hand deliveries should be sent to Ms. Becky Brooks, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment, Room 2406, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information, contact EPA's Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment at 202   566   2777. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FY2004 Brownfield Grants Guidelines will be issued under section 104( k) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ( CERCLA) as amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, Public Law 107   118 ( SBLRBRA). Guidelines for grant programs are exempt from notice and comment requirements under 5 U. S. C. 553( a)( 2). However, the Agency has decided that consultation with public stakeholders prior to issuing the final version of the Brownfield Grants Guidelines is an appropriate step in effectively implementing the Brownfields Law. The meeting is open to the general public. Parties wishing to provide their views to EPA on the draft FY04 Guidelines, or to listen to the views of other parties, are strongly encouraged to attend the public meeting. Interested parties not able to attend the public meeting on September 8, 2003, may submit written comments to the Agency. All written comments must be received by the Agency no later than September 8, 2003. The Agency will carefully consider comments received during the public meeting, as well as written comments received on or before September 8, 2003, prior to issuing final Brownfield Grants Guidelines in September 2003. However, due to the need to provide the final Guidelines to potential applicants promptly, EPA does not plan to respond in writing to written comments.

Dated: July 28, 2003. Linda Garczynski, Director, Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment. [ FR Doc. 03   19746 Filed 8   1   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7538   8]

Final Reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Storm Water Construction General Permit for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Indian Country in Massachusetts AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of Final Reissuance of NPDES Storm Water Construction General Permits.

SUMMARY: This action provides notice of the reissuance of the Final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Storm Water Construction General Permit for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Indian country within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. DATES: Today's action shall be effective August 4, 2003. The permit will expire five years from the effective date. ADDRESSES: The final permit is based on an administrative record. The administrative record for the final construction general permit is available for inspection and copying at the Water Docket, located at the EPA Docket Center in the basement of the EPA West VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 01 Aug 01, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 04AUN1. SGM 04AUN1 45818 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 2003 / Notices Building, Room B   102, at 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information concerning the final permit, the permit's Notice of Intent ( NOI), or the permit's Notice of Termination ( NOT) is available on EPA's Web site at http:// www. epa. gov/ npdes/ stormwater/ cgp. cfm or from Thelma Murphy, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Environmental Protection Agency, 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114   2023; telephone: 617   918   1615; e mail: murphy. thelma@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information On July 1, 2003 ( 68 FR 39087), EPA published final NPDES construction general permits for large construction activity in Regions 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Also on July 1, 2003 ( 68 FR 39087), EPA published final NPDES construction general permits for small construction activity in Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. At the time of publication, the State Coastal Zone Management Act certification for Massachusetts had not been received, therefore the neither the small or large construction activity general permits were issued in Massachusetts. EPA Region 1 received certification from the Office of Coastal Zone Management. The Office concurred with EPA's certification that the permit as proposed is consistent with the Coastal Zone Management enforceable program policies. Today's action reissues EPA's NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and Indian country in Massachusetts. The permit's terms and conditions are those set forth in the Construction General Permit reissued on July 1, 2003 ( 68 FR 39087) and available at http:// www. epa. gov/ npdes/ stormwater/ cgp. The state specific requirements for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, except Indian country, under section 401 of the Clean Water Act are found in part 9. A. 1 of the construction general permit. The Office of Coastal Zone Management did not add any additional requirements to the permit. Additional information regarding the statutory and regulatory history of the final permit and storm water program; significant changes to the permit; and a summary of the terms and conditions of the permit are found in the July 1, 2003 Federal Register and are not being repeated here. II. Executive Order 12866 Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735 ( October 4, 1993)) the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is `` significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines `` significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: ( 1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $ 100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; ( 2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; ( 3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or ( 4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. OMB has exempted review of NPDES general permits under the terms of Executive Order 12866.

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. Issuance of an NPDES general permit is not subject to rulemaking requirements, under APA section 553 or any other law, and is thus not subject to the RFA requirements. The APA defines two broad, mutually exclusive categories of agency action   ` ` rules'' and `` orders.'' Its definition of `` rule'' encompasses `` an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or describing the organization, procedure, or practice requirements of an agency * * *'' APA section 551( 4). Its definition of `` order'' is residual: `` a final disposition * * * of an agency in a matter other than rule making but including licensing.'' APA section 551( 6) ( emphasis added). The APA defines `` license'' to `` include * * * an agency permit * * *'' APA section 551( 8). The APA thus categorizes a permit as an order, which by the APA's definition is not a rule. Section 553 of the APA establishes `` rule making'' requirements. The APA defines `` rule making'' as `` the agency process for formulating, amending, or repealing a rule.'' APA section 551( 5). By its terms, then, section 553 applies only to `` rules'' and not also to `` orders,'' which include permits.

IV. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA), Public Law 104   4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their `` regulatory actions'' on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. UMRA uses the term `` regulatory actions'' to refer to regulations. ( See, e. g., UMRA section 201, `` Each agency shall * * * assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions * * * ( other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements specifically set forth in law)'' ( emphasis added)). UMRA section 102 defines `` regulation'' by reference to 2 U. S. C. 658 which in turn defines `` regulation'' and `` rule'' by reference to section 601( 2) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA). That section of the RFA defines `` rule'' as `` any rule for which the agency publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to section 553( b) of [ the Administrative Procedure Act ( APA)], or any other law. * * *'' As discussed in the RFA section of this notice, NPDES general permits are not `` rules'' under the APA and thus not subject to the APA requirement to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking. NPDES general permits are also not subject to such a requirement under the CWA. While EPA publishes a notice to solicit public comment on draft general permits, it does so pursuant to the CWA section 402( a) requirement to provide `` an opportunity for a hearing.'' Thus, NPDES general permits are not `` rules'' for RFA or UMRA purposes.

V. Paperwork Reduction Act EPA has reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities resulting from the final construction general permit under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements of the construction general permit for large construction activities have already been approved by the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) ( OMB Control No. 2040   0188) in previous submissions made for the NPDES permit program under the provisions of the Clean Water Act. Information collection requirements of the construction general VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 01 Aug 01, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 04AUN1. SGM 04AUN1 45819 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 2003 / Notices permit for small construction activities were submitted to OMB ( OMB Control No. 2040   0211) for review and approval and will be published in a separate Federal Register Notice.

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U. S. C. 1251 et seq.

Dated: July 16, 2003. Linda M. Murphy, Director, Office of Ecosystem Protection. [ FR Doc. 03   19744 Filed 8   1   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7539   2]

Clean Water Act Section 303( d): Availability of 5 Total Maximum Daily Loads ( TMDLs)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability for comment of the administrative record file for 5 TMDLs and the calculations for these TMDLs prepared by EPA Region 6 for waters listed in the state of Arkansas under section 303( d) of the Clean Water Act ( CWA). These TMDLs were completed in response to the lawsuit styled Sierra Club, et al. v. Browner, et al., No. LR   C   99   114. DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing to EPA on or before September 3, 2003. ADDRESSES: Comments on the 5 TMDLs should be sent to Ellen Caldwell, Environmental Protection Specialist, Water Quality Protection Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, TX 75202   2733, facsimile ( 214) 665   6490, or e mail: caldwell. ellen@ epa. gov. For further information, contact Ellen Caldwell at ( 214) 665   7513. Documents from the administrative record file for these TMDLs are available for public inspection at this address as well. Documents from the administrative record file may be viewed at http:// www. epa. gov/ region6/ water/ artmdl. htm, or obtained by calling or writing Ms. Caldwell at the above address. Please contact Ms. Caldwell to schedule an inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Caldwell at ( 214) 665   7513.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1999, five Arkansas environmental groups, the Sierra Club, Federation of Fly Fishers, Crooked Creek Coalition, Arkansas Fly Fishers, and Save our Streams ( plaintiffs), filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA), styled Sierra Club, et al. v. Browner, et al., No. LR   C   99   114. Among other claims, plaintiffs alleged that EPA failed to establish Arkansas TMDLs in a timely manner. EPA proposes these TMDLs pursuant to a consent decree entered in this lawsuit.

EPA Seeks Comment on 5 TMDLs By this notice EPA is seeking comment on the following 5 TMDLs for waters located within the state of Arkansas:

Segment reach Waterbody name Pollutant 08040201   706   16 Flat Creek Chloride. 08040201   706   16 Flat Creek Sulfate. 08040201   706   16 Flat Creek TDS. 08040201   806   8 Salt Creek Chloride. 08040201   806   8 Salt Creek TDS.

EPA requests that the public provide to EPA any water quality related data and information that may be relevant to the calculations for these 5 TMDLs. EPA will review all data and information submitted during the public comment period and revise the TMDLs and determinations where appropriate. EPA will then forward the TMDLs to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality ( ADEQ). The ADEQ will incorporate the TMDLs into its current water quality management plan. The EPA also will revise the Arkansas 303( d) list as appropriate.

Dated: July 24, 2003. Miguel I. Flores, Director, Water Quality Protection Division, Region 6. [ FR Doc. 03   19741 Filed 8   1   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [ CC Docket 98   67; DA 03   2409]

Notice of Certification of State Telecommunications Relay Service ( TRS) Programs AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this document is to notify state Telecommunications Relay Service ( TRS) programs that certification of their program has been granted through July 26, 2008. Notice is hereby given that the applications for certification of state Telecommunications Relay Services ( TRS) programs of the states listed below have been granted, subject to the condition described below, pursuant to Title IV of the Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA), 47 USC. 225 ( f)( 2), and § 64.605( b) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 64.605( b). On the basis of the state applications, the Commission has determined that: the TRS program of the states meet or exceed all operational, technical, and functional minimum standards contained in section 64.604 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 64.604; the TRS programs of the listed states make available adequate procedures and remedies for enforcing the requirements of the state program; and the TRS programs of the listed states in no way conflict with federal law. DATES: This certification shall remain in effect for a five year period, beginning July 26, 2003, and ending July 25, 2008, pursuant to 47 CFR 64.605( c). ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erica Myers, ( 202) 418   2429 ( voice), ( 202) 418   0464 ( TTY), or e mail Erica. Myers@ fcc. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Public Notice, DA 03   2409, CC Docket No. CC 98   67 released July 24, 2003. Copies of applications for certification are available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY   A257, Washington, DC 20554. The applications for certification are also available on the Commission's Web site at http:// www. fcc. gov/ cgb/ dro/ trs_ by_ state. html. They may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 44512th Street, SW., Room CY   B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone ( 202) 863   2893, facsimile ( 202) 863   2898, or via e mail qualexint@ aol. com. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities ( Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e mail to fcc504@ fcc. gov or call Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau, at ( 202) 418   0531 ( voice), ( 202) 418   7365 9 ( TTY). The Public Notice can also be downloaded in Text and ASCII formats at: http:// www. fcc. gov/ cgb/ dro.

Synopsis The Commission also has determined that, where applicable, the intrastate funding mechanisms of the listed states are labeled in a manner that promotes VerDate jul< 14> 2003 19: 01 Aug 01, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 04AUN1. SGM 04AUN1


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10403-10406]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4161]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0145; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-066-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes.
The existing AD currently requires revising the Airworthiness
Limitations Section of the maintenance planning data (MPD) document.
Since we issued that AD, a re-evaluation of certain doors and flaps was
done based on their fatigue-critical nature. This proposed AD would
revise the maintenance program to incorporate an additional limitation,
and would add airplanes to the applicability. We are proposing this AD
to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the principal structural
element (PSEs), which could adversely affect the structural integrity
of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 9, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: 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 Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6577; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-0145;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-066-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On September 4, 2003, we issued AD 2003-18-10, amendment 39-13301
(68 FR 53503, September 11, 2003), for certain The Boeing Company Model
767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes. That AD requires
revising Subsection B, Section 9, of Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning
Data (MPD) Document D622T001-9, titled ``Airworthiness Limitations
(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs),'' to
incorporate Revision October 2002; and Appendix B of Boeing 767 MPD
Document D622T001, Revision December 2002. That AD resulted from
analysis of data that identified specific initial inspection thresholds
and repetitive inspection intervals for certain principal structural
elements (PSEs) to be added to the airworthiness limitation
instructions (ALI). We issued that AD to ensure that fatigue cracking
of various PSEs is detected and corrected; such fatigue cracking could
adversely affect the structural integrity of these airplanes.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2003-18-10 (68 FR 53503, September 11, 2003), a
re-evaluation of certain doors and flaps was done based on their
fatigue-critical nature. These items were classified as PSEs and have
been included in the revised MPD Document.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--Structural
Inspections, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622T001-9, Revision
July 2011, of the Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document.
This service information describes procedures for an additional
critical fatigue inspection.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2003-18-10
(68 FR 53503, September 11, 2003). This proposed AD would revise the
Airworthiness Limitations Section of the Maintenance Planning Data
(MPD) Document 767 Airworthiness Limitations Instructions (ALI) which
adds a critical fatigue inspection and revises the applicability to
include additional airplane line numbers.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2003-18-10
(68 FR 53503, September 11, 2003). Since AD 2003-18-10 was issued, the
AD format has been revised, and certain paragraphs have been
rearranged. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have
changed in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement in AD 2003-18-10 (68 FR   Corresponding requirement in this
     53503, September 11, 2003)                  proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           paragraph (c)                        paragraph (g)
           paragraph (d)                        paragraph (h)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 417 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise airworthiness limitations      1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0              $85          $35,445
 [retained actions from existing AD    hour = $85.
 2003-18-10 (68 FR 53503, September
 11, 2003)].
Revise airworthiness limitations      1 work-hour x $85 per                  0               85           35,445
 [new requirements].                   hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive
(AD) 2003-18-10, Amendment 39-13301 (68 FR 53503, September 11, 2003),
and adding the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2012-0145; Directorate Identifier
2011-NM-066-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 9,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2003-18-10, Amendment 39-13301 (68 FR
53503, September 11, 2003).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -
300F, and -400ER series airplanes; certificated in any category;
line numbers 1 through 997 inclusive.

    Note 1:  This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance according
to paragraph (k) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued damage tolerance of the affected structure. The FAA
has provided guidance for this determination in Advisory Circular
(AC) 25.1529-1A.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 51, Standard Practices/Structures; 52, Doors;
53, Fuselage structure; 54, Nacelle/Pylons; 55, Stabilizers; 56,
Windows; and 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a re-evaluation of certain doors and
flaps based on their fatigue-critical nature. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the principal structural
elements (PSEs), which could adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

Restatement of Requirements AD 2003-18-10, Amendment 39-13301 (68 FR
53503, September 11, 2003), With New Service Information

(g) Revise Section 9 of the Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD)
Document

    For Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes
having line numbers 1 through 895 inclusive: Within 18 months after
October 16, 2003 (the effective date AD 2003-18-10, (68 FR 53503,
September 11, 2003)), revise Subsection B, Section 9, of Boeing 767
MPD Document D622T001-9, entitled ``Airworthiness Limitations and
Certification Maintenance Requirements,'' to incorporate Revision
October 2002; and Appendix B of Boeing 767 MPD Document D622T001,
Revision December 2002; or Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--
Structural Limitations, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations
(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622T001-
9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 767 MPD Document.

(h) Alternative Inspections and Inspection Intervals

    Except as provided by paragraphs (i) and (k) of this AD: After
the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD have been
accomplished, no alternative inspections or inspection intervals
shall be approved for the structural significant items (SSIs)
contained in Section 9 of Boeing 767 MPD Document D622T001-9,
Revision October 2002.

New Requirements of This AD

(i) Maintenance Program Revision

    Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the
maintenance program to incorporate the limitations section in
Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections, of
Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622T001-9, Revision July 2011, of
the Boeing 767 MPD Document. Doing this revision terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

    Note 2:  For the purposes of this AD, the terms principal
structural elements (PSEs) as used in this AD, and SSIs as used in
Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--Structural Inspections, of
Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622T001-9, Revision July 2011, of
the Boeing 767 MPD Document, are considered to be interchangeable.

(j) Alternative Inspections and Inspection Intervals

    Except as provided by paragraph (k) of this AD: After the
actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD have been accomplished,
no alternative inspections or inspection intervals shall be approved
for the SSIs contained in Subsection B, Airworthiness Limitations--
Structural Inspections, of Section 9, Airworthiness Limitations
(AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D622T001-
9, Revision July 2011, of the Boeing 767 MPD Document.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
ANM-120S, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information

directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the
person identified in the Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO) to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Berhane Alazar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 9, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-4161 Filed 2-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18684-18686]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07460]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9909-06-Region 10]

Proposed Reissuance of NPDES General Permit for Groundwater
Remediation Discharge Facilities in Idaho (Permit Number IDG911000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed reissuance of NPDES General Permit and
request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 proposes
to reissue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Groundwater Remediation Discharge Facilities in
Idaho (GWGP). As proposed, the GWGP authorizes the discharge of
groundwater from remediation sites to Waters of the U.S. within the
State of Idaho from both facilities with existing coverage and new
facilities interested in seeking coverage. The draft GWGP contains
technology-based and water quality-based effluent limitations for
conventional and toxic water quality pollutants, along with
administrative reporting and monitoring requirements, as well as
standard conditions, prohibitions, and management practices. A fact
sheet is available that explains the draft GWGP in detail.
    Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341, requires EPA to
seek a certification from the State of Idaho that the conditions of the
GWGP are stringent enough to comply with State water quality standards.
The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) has provided a
draft certification that the draft GWGP complies with State of Idaho
Water Quality Standards (IDAPA 58.01.02), including the State's
antidegradation policy. EPA intends to seek a final certification from
IDEQ prior to issuing the final GWGP. This is also notice of the draft
Sec.  401 certification provided by IDEQ. Persons wishing to comment on
the draft State certification should send written comments to Ms.
Miranda Adams; Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, State Office,
Surface Water Program; 1410 North Hilton Street; Boise, Idaho 83706 or
via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
DATES: The public comment period for the draft GWGP will be from the
date of publication of this Notice until May 19, 2014. Comments must be
received or postmarked by no later than midnight Pacific Standard Time
on May 19, 2014. All comments related to the draft GWGP and Fact Sheet
received by EPA Region 10 by the comment deadline will be considered
prior to issuing the final GWGP.
    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by any of the
following methods. All comments must include the name, address, and
telephone number of the commenter.
    Mail: Send paper comments to Ms. Jill Nogi, Office of Water and
Watersheds; USEPA Region 10; 1200 6th Ave, Suite 900, OWW-130; Seattle,
Washington 98101.
    Email: Send electronic comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Make sure to
write ``Comments on the Draft Idaho Groundwater Remediation General
Permit'' in the subject line.
    Fax: Fax comments to the attention of Jill Nogi at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Deliver comments to Jill Nogi, EPA Region
10, Office of Water and Watersheds, Mail Stop OWW-130, 1200 6th Avenue,
Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101-3140. Call<PHONE_NUMBER> before delivery
to verify business hours.
    Viewing and/or Obtaining Copies of Documents. A copy of the draft
GWGP and the Fact Sheet, which explains the proposal in detail, may be
obtained by contacting EPA at 1<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Copies of the documents are also available for viewing and downloading
at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/water.nsf/NPDES+Public+Notices/id_gwgp_pn_2014. Requests may also be made to Audrey Washington at (206)
553-0523 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Public Informational Meeting: May 1, 2014; 11:00 a.m.--1:00 p.m.;
in Boise, Idaho; at the Banner Building, 950 W. Bannock Street, 2nd
Floor Conference Room. Presentation on the Draft GWGP from 11:00 a.m.-
11:30 a.m., Q & A from 11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Conference Call-In Number
from 11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.; 1-866-299-3188; conference code
2065530775 . Open House from 12:30 p.m.-1:00 p.m.
    Public Hearing: Persons wishing to request a public hearing should
submit their written request by May 19, 2014 stating the nature of the
issues to be raised as well as the requester's name, address, and
telephone number to Jill Nogi at the address above. If a public hearing
is scheduled, notice will be published in the Federal Register. Notice
will also be posted on the Region 10 Web site, and will be mailed to
all interested persons receiving letters of the availability of the
Draft GWGP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information can be obtained
by contacting Jill Nogi, Office of Water and Watersheds, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10. Contact information
included above in the ``Submitting Comments'' section.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The currently expired Groundwater General
Permit NPDES General Permit, No. IDG910000 (2007 Permit), was issued by
EPA on July 1, 2007. The 2007 Permit expired on June 30, 2012. The 2007
Permit remains in effect for those Permittees who obtained an
administrative extension of the authorization to discharge before the
permit expired. The current draft GWGP does not provide coverage for
the discharge from mining operations. Those existing mining operations
with an EPA administrative extension of coverage under the 2007 Permit
may continue to operate under the limitations and conditions of the
2007 Permit until such time as a new permit is issued for those
facilities.
    In addition, EPA proposes to make the following major changes with
the reissued permit:
     Revised effluent limitations based on:
    1. Idaho's newer (2006) WQS. (The 2007 GWGP used Idaho's 2005 WQS.)
EPA calculated different water-quality based effluent limits (WQBELs)
for receiving waters designated as a Domestic Water Supply (DWS) in
accordance with the State of Idaho Surface Water Quality Standards at
IDAPA 58.01.02;
    2. Minimum hardness values for hardness-dependent metals of 25 mg/L
and 10 mg/L for cadmium; and,
    3. Requiring average monthly and maximum daily effluent limits for
continuous dischargers, and daily maximum effluent limits for non-
continuous dischargers.
     A provision requiring a BMP Plan, which is standard for
industrial permittees. The last GWGP required an Operation &
Maintenance (O&M) Plan. Those requirements have now been incorporated
into the BMP Plan provision;
     Requirements for more frequent monitoring and an expanded
list of COCs to monitor;
     A requirement to use NetDMR, which enables the electronic
submission of monitoring data and monthly discharge monitoring reports
to EPA and IDEQ.

Other Legal Requirements

    Endangered Species Act [16 U.S.C. 1531 et al.]. Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires Federal agencies to consult with
NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
(the Services) if their actions have the potential to either
beneficially or adversely affect any threatened or endangered species.
The Draft GWGP does not authorize discharges from groundwater
remediation facilities in Idaho to any receiving waters where federally
listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species, or designated or
proposed critical habitat, pursuant to the ESA, are present. ESA
consultation will be required for individual situations where an
applicant requests a waiver to discharge to a receiving water excluded
from coverage for ESA reasons. Therefore, the EPA has evaluated the
Draft GWGP and has made the determination that issuance of the GWGP
will have no effect on any threatened, endangered, or candidate
species; designated critical habitat, or essential fish habitat; and
therefore, ESA consultation is not required.
    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.]
and Other Federal Requirements. Regulations at 40 CFR 122.49, list the
federal laws that may apply to the issuance of permits i.e., ESA,
National Historic Preservation Act, the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA), NEPA, and Executive Orders, among
others.
    The NEPA compliance program requires analysis of information
regarding potential impacts, development and analysis of options to
avoid or minimize impacts; and development and analysis of measures to
mitigate adverse impacts.
    Due to the fact that groundwater remediation facilities do not have
any EPA-promulgated effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs) under CWA
section 304 or new source performance standards (NSPS) specific to
their operation, EPA determined that no Environmental Assessments (EAs)
or Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) are required under NEPA.
Idaho is not located in the U.S. coastal zone, so CZARA does not apply.
In addition, the GWGP will not authorize the construction of any water
resources facility or the impoundment of any water body or have any
effect on historical property, and does exclude receiving waters with
ESA species present or with Wild and Scenic River designations.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq., and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16
U.S.C. 470 et seq., also do not apply to the issuance of the GWGP.
    Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Management and Conservation Act requires EPA to consult with NOAA-NMFS
when a proposed discharge has the potential to adversely affect a
designated EFH. The EFH regulations define an adverse effect as ``any
impact which reduces quality and/or quantity of EFH . . . [and] may
include direct (e.g. contamination or physical disruption), indirect
(e.g. loss of prey, reduction in species' fecundity), site-specific or
habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic
consequences of actions.'' NMFS may recommend measures for attachment
to the federal action to protect EFH; however, such recommendations are
advisory, and not prescriptive in nature.
    EPA has determined that the issuance of this Draft GWGP has no
effect on EFH. The Draft GWGP does not authorize discharges from
groundwater remediation facilities in Idaho to any receiving waters
where EFH has been designated. Coordination with NMFS will be required
for individual situations where an applicant requests a waiver to
discharge to a receiving water excluded from coverage for EFH reasons.
Therefore, the EPA has evaluated the Draft GWGP and has made the
determination that issuance of the GWGP will have no effect on EFH. If,
during the course of the process it is determined that the discharge
may need

``extensive conservation requirements necessary to protect'' EFH, the
facility may need to apply for an individual permit.
    Executive Order 12866: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
exempts this action from the review requirements of Executive Order
12866 pursuant to Section 6 of that order.
    Economic Impact [Executive Order 12291]: The EPA has reviewed the
effect of Executive Order 12291 on this Draft GWGP and has determined
that it is not a major rule pursuant to that Order.
    Paperwork Reduction Act [44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.] The EPA has
reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities in the Draft
GWGP and finds them consistent with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.] The Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that EPA prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for rules subject to the requirements of the
Administrative Procedures Act [APA, 5 U.S.C. 553] that have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. However,
EPA has concluded that NPDES General Permits are not rulemakings under
the APA, and thus not subject to APA rulemaking requirements or the
RFA.
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law 104-4, generally requires Federal
agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions (defined to
be the same as rules subject to the RFA) on tribal, state, and local
governments, and the private sector. However, General NPDES Permits are
not rules subject to the requirements of the APA, and are, therefore,
not subject to the UMRA.

    Authority: This action is taken under the authority of Section
402 of the Clean Water Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1342. I hereby
provide public notice of the Draft Idaho GWGP in accordance with 40
CFR 124.10.

    Dated: March 27, 2014.
Daniel D. Opalski,
Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, Region 10, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-07460 Filed 4-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40403-40405]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17473]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9998-14-OAR]

Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
Hyundai Motor Company and Kia Motors Corporation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from Hyundai Motor
Company (``Hyundai'') and Kia Motors Corporation (``Kia'') for off-
cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty
vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission
reductions can be achieved by employing technologies that result in
real-world benefits, but where that benefit is not adequately captured
on the test procedures used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance
with emission standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
program acknowledges these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers
several options for generating ``off-cycle'' CO2 credits.
Under the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2
credits for off-cycle technologies that result in off-cycle benefits.
In these cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed
methodology for determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Hyundai
and Kia have submitted applications that describe methodologies for
determining off-cycle credits from technologies described in their
application. Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making
Hyundai's and Kia's off-cycle credit calculation methodologies
available for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 13, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2019-0459, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberts French, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax:
(734) 214-4869. Email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option for model
years prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions
for technologies that are on the predetermined list, or to demonstrate
reductions that exceed those available via use of the predetermined
list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
    \3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
     Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
     Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
     Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
     Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the

technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
     The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
     The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

A. High-Efficiency Alternators

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Hyundai
and Kia are applying for credits for model years 2010 and later for
off-cycle credits using the alternative demonstration methodology
pathway for high-efficiency alternators. Automotive alternators convert
mechanical energy from a combustion engine into electrical energy that
can be used to power a vehicle's electrical systems. Alternators
inherently place a load on the engine, which results in increased fuel
consumption and CO2 emissions. High efficiency alternators
use new technologies to reduce the overall load on the engine yet
continue to meet the electrical demands of the vehicle systems,
resulting in lower fuel consumption and lower CO2 emissions.
Some comments on EPA's proposed rule for GHG standards for the 2016-
2025 model years suggested that EPA provide a credit for high-
efficiency alternators on the pre-defined list in the regulations.
While EPA agreed that high-efficiency alternators can reduce electrical
load and reduce fuel consumption, and that these impacts are not seen
on the emission test procedures because accessories that use
electricity are turned off, EPA noted the difficulty in defining a one-
size-fits-all credit due to lack of data. Since then, however a
methodology has been developed that scales credits based on the
efficiency of the alternator; alternators with efficiency (as measured
using an accepted industry standard procedure) above a baseline value
could get credits. EPA has previously approved credits for high-
efficiency alternators using this methodology for Ford Motor Company,
General Motors Corporation, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, and Toyota Motor
Company. Details of the testing and analysis can be found in the
manufacturer's applications.

B. Hyundai and Kia Stop-Start System

    Hyundai and Kia applied for engine idle stop-start credit covering
2012-2016 model year vehicles with stop-start technology, including
hybrid electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Based on
the analysis presented in their application, they are requesting a
credit of 3.7 grams/mile for vehicles with stop-start technology that
are not hybrids, and 3.8 grams/mile for hybrid electric and plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles.
    The methodology used by Hyundai and Kia was essentially the same as
that used by Mercedes and approved by EPA in September of 2014.\5\ This
methodology is based on the following analyses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``EPA Decision Document: Mercedes-Benz Off-cycle Credits for
MYs 2012-2016.'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-420-R-14-
025, September 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Estimate or measure the total idle fraction as a
percentage of all vehicle operation in the real-world;
     Estimate or measure the percentage of idle fraction that
the stop-start system is enabled out of all the available idle time
(i.e., eligible stop-start percentage or stop-start system
effectiveness);
     Determine the benefit of the stop-start system in grams
per mile based on A-B emissions testing (i.e., technology on and off);
     Multiply the eligible real world stop-start time (relative
to the 2-cycle eligible time) by the stop-start system benefit to
estimate the idle stop-start credit; and,
     For vehicles that allow the driver to disable the stop-
start system, the frequency of disablement by the driver must be
determined.
    The Mercedes application and EPA's Decision Document are both
available on EPA's website; however, for convenience the table below
shows a comparison of the key inputs to the methodologies approved by
EPA for Mercedes and proposed by Hyundai and Kia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Mercedes (as     Hyundai-Kia
                  Input                     approved by    (proposed in
                                               EPA)        application)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idle Time Fraction......................            22.7            22.7
System Effectiveness....................             52%           59.4%
Driver Disablement......................             11%            1.6%
Credit (g/mi)...........................        ~3.5-4.5         3.7-3.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by the manufacturer (with confidential business information
redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section
above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.
    EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications for
off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision
available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple
decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the

broad methodologies used by these manufacturers could potentially be
used for other vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle
specific data needed to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions
would likely be different. In such cases, a new application would be
required, including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: August 5, 2019.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2019-17473 Filed 8-13-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


CD containing “Zip File.abc

“ZIP File” includes all MOBILE 6.2 Input, Output, and External Files
used in preparing Connecticut’s SIP Revision – Establishment of
Interim Progress for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality
Standard.

Please contact Donald Cooke at the EPA New England Regional Office if
you wish a copy of the electronic files.  E-mail   HYPERLINK
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone (617)
918-1668.

A list of the electronic files provided on the submitted CD, within the
zipped “Zip File.abc” file, are provided below:

CD: \ Zip File.zip                   “Zip File.abc”

Name	Size	Type	Last Modified

02CTY28s.VMT 	784	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02CTY28w.VMT 	784	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02pmfnh2.in 	22KB	IN File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02PMFNH2.PM 	47KB	PM File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02PMFNH2.TXT 	79KB	Text Document	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt1s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt1W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt2s.cty 	5,860	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt2W.cty 	5,860	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt3s.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt3W.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt4s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt4W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt5s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt5W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt6s.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt6W.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt7s.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt7W.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt8s.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02svmt8W.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02TWN28s.VMT 	16KB	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

02TWN28w.VMT 	16KB	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09CTY28s.VMT 	784	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09CTY28w.VMT 	784	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09pmfnh2.in 	22KB	IN File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09PMFNH2.PM 	47KB	PM File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09PMFNH2.TXT 	83KB	Text Document	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt1s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt1W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt2s.cty 	5,860	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt2W.cty 	5,860	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt3s.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt3W.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt4s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt4W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt5s.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt5W.cty 	5,861	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt6s.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt6W.cty 	5,862	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt7s.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt7W.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt8s.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09svmt8W.cty 	5,859	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09TWN28s.VMT 	16KB	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

09TWN28w.VMT 	16KB	VMT File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

ASMDATA.D 	52KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

CTDB.OPT 	196	OPT File	1/24/2007 9:40 AM

ctfvmt.def 	22KB	DEF File	1/24/2007 9:40 AM

cthvmt.def 	401	DEF File	1/24/2007 9:40 AM

CTIM02.D 	2,000	D File	1/24/2007 9:40 AM

CTIM05pl.D 	2,362	D File	1/24/2007 9:40 AM

CTReg02.d 	7,875	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

DBASE.D 	163	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

DIESFRAC.DEF 	4,981	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

DSACT.D 	11KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FCVMTA.CTY 	34KB	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FCVMTF.CTY 	34KB	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FCVMTL.CTY 	34KB	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FCVMTR.CTY 	34KB	CTY File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FTP_SPD.D 	2,861	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

FVMT.DEF 	22KB	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

HSACT.D 	7,667	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

HSACTDAY.D 	7,667	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

HSACTEND.D	7,666	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

HVMT.DEF 	323	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

IMTEST.D 	549	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

MARDATA.DEF 	9,530	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

MILEDAT.D 	9,530	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

MYCUTS.D 	2,753	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

ngall.d 	16KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

NGVEF2.D 	766	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

NGVFR.D 	16KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

NLEVNE.D 	11KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

P94IMP.D 	11KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMDDR1.CSV 	4,832	MS Excel CSV File*	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMDDR2.CSV 	4,823	MS Excel CSV File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMDZML.CSV 	13KB	MS Excel CSV File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMGDR1.CSV 	11KB	MS Excel CSV File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMGDR2.CSV 	11KB	MS Excel CSV File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMGZML.CSV 	26KB	MS Excel CSV File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMNH3BER.D 	4,341	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

PMNH3SDR.D 	4,351	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

REGDATA.D 	5,760	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

SDIST.D 	988	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

SOAKDST.D 	45KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

STPERDAY.D 	3,032	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

SVMT.DEF 	5,456	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

T2CERT.D 	1,533	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

T2EVAP.D 	328	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

T2EXH.D 	12KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

TECH12.D 	61KB	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

VMTMIX.DEF 	2,122	DEF File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

WEDATRIP.D 	899	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

WEENTRIP.D 	899	D File	1/24/2007 10:26 AM

______________________________________

* MS Excel CSV File is a Microsoft Excel Comma Separated Values File