UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 9, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-1995-263

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant: AEROVIAS de MEXICO, S.A. de C.V.  (Aeromexico)		Date Filed:
October 11, 2005

Relief requested:  Renewal of exemption from 49 USC § 41301 to permit
the applicant to conduct scheduled foreign air transportation of
persons, property, and mail between Cancun, Mexico, and Atlanta,
Georgia.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  November 18, 2004, in
this Docket.

Applicant representative:  William C. Evans,<PHONE_NUMBER>	DOT analyst:
Robert J. Finamore,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved.
                                     Action date:  November 9, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  November 9, 2005, through
November 9, 2006.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity): United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations of our standard exemption conditions
(attached), and to the otherwise-applicable terms, conditions, and
limitations of Aeromexico’s foreign air carrier permit (Order
91-5-25).

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

FOREIGN CARRIER EXEMPTION CONDITIONS
                              ATTACHMENT

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

1) Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

2) Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

3) Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage contained
in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any operations
under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the form of a
completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation Administration’s
Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards Service (any
changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be filed with that
office);

4) Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

5) Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

6) Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

7) Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: a) based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or b) based on
a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term “international air transportation” means “international
transportation” as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

8) Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

9) Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department’s
rules governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations
required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the Department,
with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S. agencies and
courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

 05/2004


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 111 (Wednesday, June 10, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32950-32951]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14227]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL- 9929-02-Region-6]

Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for the State of
Arkansas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of tentative approval.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the State of Arkansas is revising
its approved Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program. Arkansas
has adopted the Revised Total Coliform Rule (RTCR) by reference under
Sections I.B, V.A and VII of the Arkansas Rules and Regulations
Pertaining to Public Water Systems. EPA has determined that the RTCR
primacy application submitted by Arkansas is no less stringent than the
corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends to approve
this PWSS program revision package.

DATES: All interested parties may request a public hearing. A request
for a public hearing must be submitted by July 10, 2015 to the Regional
Administrator at the EPA Region 6 address shown below. Frivolous or
insubstantial requests for a hearing may be denied by the Regional
Administrator. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing
is made by July 10, 2015, a public hearing will be held. If no timely
and appropriate request for a hearing is received and the Regional
Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, this
determination shall become final and effective on July 10, 2015. Any
request for a public hearing shall include the following information:
The name, address, and telephone number of the individual,
organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; a brief statement
of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's
determination and a brief statement of the information that the
requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and the signature
of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on
behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a
responsible official of the organization or other entity.

ADDRESSES: All documents relating to this determination are available
for

inspection between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, at the following offices: Arkansas Department of Health,
Engineering Section, 4815 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas
72205; and United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6,
Drinking Water Section (6WQ-SD), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202. Copies of the documents which explain the rule can also be
obtained at EPA's Web site at https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/13/2012-31205/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations-revisions-to-the-total-coliform-rule and https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2014/02/26/2014-04173/national-primary-drinking-water-regulations-minor-corrections-to-the-revisions-to-the-total-coliform, or by writing or calling Ms. Evelyn Rosborough
at the address below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Evelyn
Rosborough, Environmental Protection Specialist, Water Quality
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6,
1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, TX 75202-2733, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking
Water Act, as amended (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulations.

    Dated: June 2, 2015.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-14227 Filed 6-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 203 (Friday, October 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64367-64368]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25738]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 38a-1, OMB Control No. 3235-0586, SEC File No. 270-522.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 38a-1 (17 CFR 270.38a-1) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a) (``Investment Company Act'') is intended to
protect investors by fostering better fund compliance with securities
laws. The rule requires every registered investment company and
business development company (``fund'') to: (i) Adopt and implement
written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent
violations of the federal securities laws by the fund, including
procedures for oversight of compliance by each investment adviser,
principal underwriter, administrator, and transfer agent of the fund;
(ii) obtain the fund board of directors' approval of those policies and
procedures; (iii) annually review the adequacy of those policies and
procedures and the policies and procedures of each investment adviser,
principal underwriter, administrator, and transfer agent of the fund,
and the effectiveness of their implementation; (iv) designate a chief
compliance officer to administer the fund's policies and procedures and
prepare an annual report to the board that addresses certain specified
items relating to the policies and procedures; and (v) maintain for
five years the compliance policies and procedures and the chief
compliance officer's annual report to the board.
    The rule contains certain information collection requirements that
are designed to ensure that funds establish and maintain comprehensive,
written internal compliance programs. The information collections also
assist the Commission's examination staff in assessing the adequacy of
funds' compliance programs.
    While Rule 38a-1 requires each fund to maintain written policies
and procedures, most funds are located within a fund complex. The
experience of the Commission's examination and oversight staff suggests
that each fund in a complex is able to draw extensively from the fund
complex's ``master'' compliance program to assemble appropriate
compliance policies and procedures. Many fund complexes already have
written policies and procedures documenting their compliance programs.
Further, a fund needing to develop or revise policies and procedures on
one or more topics in order to achieve a comprehensive compliance
program can draw on a number of outlines and model programs available
from a variety of industry representatives, commentators, and
organizations.
    There are approximately 4,237 funds subject to Rule 38a-1. Among
these funds, 146 were newly registered in the past year. These 146
funds, therefore, were required to adopt and document the policies and
procedures that make up their compliance programs. Commission staff
estimates that the average annual hour burden for a fund to adopt and
document these policies and procedures is 105 hours. Thus, we estimate
that the aggregate annual burden hours associated with the adoption and
documentation requirement is 15,330 hours.
    In 2010, Commission staff began to estimate the hour burden
associated with money market funds' adoption of certain policies and
procedures aimed at ensuring that these funds meet reasonably
foreseeable shareholder redemptions (the ``general liquidity
requirement''). Commission staff estimates that each newly-registered
money market fund will incur a one-time additional average burden of 9
hours to document and adopt policies and procedures that will assist in
complying with the general liquidity requirement. Approximately 10
money market funds were newly registered in the past year. Thus, we
estimate that the additional aggregate annual burden hours associated
with general liquidity requirement policies and procedures is 90 hours.
    All funds are required to conduct an annual review of the adequacy
of their existing policies and procedures and the policies and
procedures of each investment adviser, principal underwriter,
administrator, and transfer agent of the fund, and the effectiveness of
their implementation. In addition, each fund chief compliance officer
is required to prepare an annual report that addresses the operation of
the policies and procedures of the fund and the policies and procedures
of each investment adviser, principal underwriter, administrator, and
transfer agent of the fund, any material changes made to those policies
and procedures since the date of the last report, any material changes
to the policies and procedures recommended as a result of the annual
review, and certain compliance matters that occurred since

the date of the last report. The staff estimates that each fund spends
49 hours per year, on average, conducting the annual review and
preparing the annual report to the board of directors. Thus, we
estimate that the annual aggregate burden hours associated with the
annual review and annual report requirement is 207,613 hours.
    Finally, the staff estimates that each fund spends 6 hours
annually, on average, maintaining the records required by proposed Rule
38a-1. Thus, the aggregate annual burden hours associated with the
recordkeeping requirement is 25,422 hours.
    In total, the staff estimates that the aggregate annual information
collection burden of Rule 38a-1 is 248,455 hours. The estimate of
burden hours is made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act. The estimate is not derived from a comprehensive or even a
representative survey or study of the costs of Commission rules.
Complying with this collection of information requirement is mandatory.
Responses will not be kept confidential. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 15, 2012.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-25738 Filed 10-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 139 (Friday, July 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43249-43250]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17315]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-2013.

Extension:
    Rule 602. SEC File No. 270-404, OMB Control No. 3235-0461.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (``PRA'') (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 602 of Regulation NMS
(17 CFR 240.602), under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78a et seq.). The Commission plans to submit this existing collection
of information to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
extension and approval.
    Rule 602 of Regulation NMS, Dissemination of Quotations in NMS
securities, contains two related collections. The first collection of
information is found in Rule 602(a).\1\ This third-party disclosure
requirement obligates each national securities exchange and national
securities association to make available to quotation vendors for
dissemination to the public the best bid, best offer, and aggregate
quotation size for each ``subject security,'' as defined under the
Rule. The second collection of information is found in Rule 602(b).\2\
This disclosure requirement obligates any exchange member and over-the-
counter (``OTC'') market maker that is a ``responsible broker or
dealer,'' as defined under the Rule, to communicate to an exchange or
association its best bids, best offers, and quotation sizes for subject
securities.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 17 CFR 242.602(a).
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.602(b).
    \3\ Under Rule 602(b)(5), electronic communications networks
(``ECNs'') have the option of reporting to an exchange or
association for public dissemination, on behalf of customers that
are OTC market makers or exchange market makers, the best-priced
orders and the full size for such orders entered by market makers on
the ECN, to satisfy such market makers' reporting obligation under
Rule 602(b). Since this reporting requirement is an alternative
method of meeting the market makers' reporting obligation, and
because it is directed to nine or fewer persons (ECNs), this
collection of information is not subject to OMB review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'').

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

    It is anticipated that 17 respondents, consisting of 16 national
securities exchanges and one national securities association, will
collectively respond approximately 839,944,682,631 times per year
pursuant to Rule 602(a) at 18.22 microseconds per response, resulting
in a total annual burden of approximately 4,250 hours.
    It is anticipated that approximately 150 respondents, consisting of
OTC market makers, will collectively respond approximately 28,200,000
times per year pursuant to Rule 602(b) at 3 seconds per response,
resulting in a total annual burden of approximately 23,500 hours.
    Thus, the aggregate third-party disclosure burden under Rule 602 is
27,750 hours annually which is comprised of 4,250 hours relating to
Rule 602(a) and 23,500 hours relating to Rule 602(b).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate
of the burden of the proposed collections of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of collections of
information on those who are to respond, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions
submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. Please direct your
written comments to: Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Information Officer,
Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 15, 2013.
 Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-17315 Filed 7-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 34152]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14488]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1048-000.
    Applicants: Bluewater Gas Storage, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Bluewater Gas
Storage, LLC Modifications to Tariff Creditworthiness Provisions to be
effective 7/10/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150604-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/16/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-1049-000.
    Applicants: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, L.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate
Filing to Amend LER 5680's Attachment A_6-4-15 to be effective 6/4/
2015.
    Filed Date: 6/4/15.
    Accession Number: 20150604-5156.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/16/15.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-954-001.
    Applicants: Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Compliance filing per 154.203: Compliance to RP15-954-
000 to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 6/5/15.
    Accession Number: 20150605-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/17/15.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 8, 2015.
 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-14488 Filed 6-12-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 9234-9235]
[DOCID:fr03mr09-40]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP09-66-000; CP09-67-000]

Northwest Pipeline GP, Parachute Pipeline LLC; Notice of
Application

February 24, 2009.
    Take notice that on February 12, 2009, Northwest Pipeline GP
(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, filed an
application in Docket No. CP09-66-000, pursuant to section 7(b) of the
Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations,
requesting permission and approval to abandon its certificate authority
to operate the Parachute Lateral and associated facilities. Take
further notice that on this same date, Parachute Pipeline LLC, One
Williams Center, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74172, filed an application in Docket
No. CP09-67-000, pursuant to Rule 207 of the Commission's regulations,
requesting a declaratory order disclaiming jurisdiction and declaring
certain facilities (The facilities Northwest proposes to abandon in
Docket No. CP09-66-000) and services to be exempt from regulation under
the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the application
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The
filing may also be viewed on the Web at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application, Docket No. CP09-66-000,
should be directed to Lynn Dahlberg, Manager, Certificates and Tariffs,
Northwest Pipeline GP, PO Box 58900 Salt Lake City, Utah 84158,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any questions regarding this application, Docket No. CP09-67-000,
should be directed to Mari Ramsey, Senior Counsel, The Williams
Companies, Inc., One Williams Center 47th floor, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74172,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: March 17, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-4419 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 122 (Wednesday, June 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37942-37944]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13581]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437; FRL-10011-16]

Methylene Chloride (MC); Final Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) Risk Evaluation; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing the
availability of the final Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) risk
evaluation of methylene chloride (MC). The purpose of conducting risk
evaluations under TSCA is to determine whether a chemical substance
presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment
under the conditions of use, including an unreasonable risk to a
relevant potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. EPA has
determined that specific conditions of use of methylene

chloride present an unreasonable risk of injury to health. For those
conditions of use for which EPA has found an unreasonable risk, EPA
must move to address that unreasonable risk through risk management
measures enumerated in TSCA. EPA has also determined that specific
conditions of use do not present unreasonable risk of injury to health
or the environment. For those conditions of use for which EPA has found
no unreasonable risk to health or the environment, the Agency's
determination is a final Agency action and is issued via order in the
risk evaluation.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437, is available online
at http://www.regulations.gov or in-person at the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection
Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg.,
Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPPT
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Please note that due to the public health emergency the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room was closed to public visitors on March
31, 2020. Our EPA/DC staff will continue to provide customer service
via email, phone, and webform. For further information on EPA/DC
services, docket contact information and the current status of the EPA/
DC and Reading Room, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Dr. Stan Barone, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7403M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may
be of interest to persons who are or may be interested in risk
evaluations of chemical substances under TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Since other entities may also be interested in this final risk
evaluation, the EPA has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.

B. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

    TSCA section 6, 15 U.S.C. 2605, requires EPA to conduct risk
evaluations to ``determine whether a chemical substance presents an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without
consideration of costs or other nonrisk factors, including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant to the risk evaluation by the Administrator,
under the conditions of use.'' 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(A). TSCA sections
6(b)(4)(A) through (H) enumerate the deadlines and minimum requirements
applicable to this process, including provisions that provide
instruction on chemical substances that must undergo evaluation, the
minimum components of a TSCA risk evaluation, and the timelines for
public comment and completion of the risk evaluation. TSCA also
requires that EPA operate in a manner that is consistent with the best
available science, make decisions based on the weight of the scientific
evidence and consider reasonably available information. 15 U.S.C.
2625(h), (i), and (k). TSCA section 6(i) directs that a determination
of ``no unreasonable risk'' shall be issued by order and considered to
be a final Agency action, while a determination of ``unreasonable
risk'' is not considered to be a final Agency action. 15 U.S.C.
2605(i).
    The statute identifies the minimum components for all chemical
substance risk evaluations. For each risk evaluation, EPA must publish
a document that outlines the scope of the risk evaluation to be
conducted, which includes the hazards, exposures, conditions of use,
and the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations that EPA
expects to consider. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(D). The statute further
provides that each risk evaluation must also: (1) Integrate and assess
available information on hazards and exposures for the conditions of
use of the chemical substance, including information that is relevant
to specific risks of injury to health or the environment and
information on relevant potentially exposed or susceptible
subpopulations; (2) describe whether aggregate or sentinel exposures
were considered and the basis for that consideration; (3) take into
account, where relevant, the likely duration, intensity, frequency, and
number of exposures under the conditions of use; and (4) describe the
weight of the scientific evidence for the identified hazards and
exposures. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4)(F)(i)-(ii) and (iv)-(v). Each risk
evaluation must not consider costs or other nonrisk factors. 15 U.S.C.
2605(b)(4)(F)(iii).
    The statute requires that the risk evaluation process be completed
within a specified timeframe and provide an opportunity for public
comment on a draft risk evaluation prior to publishing a final risk
evaluation. 15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(4).
    In conducting risk evaluations, ``EPA will determine whether the
chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or
the environment under each condition of use within the scope of the
risk evaluation . . .'' 40 CFR 702.47. Pursuant to TSCA section
6(i)(1), a determination of ``no unreasonable risk'' shall be issued by
order and considered to be final Agency action. Under EPA's
implementing regulations, ``[a] determination by EPA that the chemical
substance, under one or more of the conditions of use within the scope
of the risk evaluation, does not present an unreasonable risk of injury
to health or the environment will be issued by order and considered to
be a final Agency action, effective on the date of issuance of the
order.'' 40 CFR 702.49(d). Subsection 5.4.1 of the final risk
evaluation for MC constitutes the order required under TSCA section
6(i)(1), and the ``no unreasonable risk'' determinations in that
subsection are considered to be a final Agency action effective on the
date of issuance of the order.

C. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is announcing the availability of the risk evaluation of the
chemical substance identified in Unit II. In this risk evaluation EPA
has made unreasonable risk determinations on all the conditions of use
within the scope of the risk evaluation for this chemical. For those
conditions of use for which EPA has found an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment, EPA must move to address those
risks through risk management measures enumerated in 15 U.S.C. 2605(a).
For those conditions of use for which EPA has found no unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment, the Agency's determination
is a final

Agency action and is issued via order, per 15 U.S.C. 2605(i)(1), in the
risk evaluation, subsection 5.4.1.
    EPA is also announcing the availability of the information required
to be provided publicly with each risk evaluation. 40 CFR 702.51.
Specifically, EPA has provided:
     The scope document and problem formulation (in Docket EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2016-0742);
     Draft risk evaluation, and final risk evaluation (in
Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437);
     All notices, determinations, findings, consent agreements,
and orders (in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437);
     Any information required to be provided to the Agency
under 15 U.S.C. 2603 (in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0742 and Docket EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2019-0437);
     A nontechnical summary of the risk evaluation (in Docket
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437);
     A list of the studies, with the results of the studies,
considered in carrying out each risk evaluation (Risk Evaluation for
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane, DCM) in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-
0437);
     The final peer review report, including the response to
peer review and public comments received during peer review (in Docket
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437); and
     Response to public comments received on the draft scope
and the draft risk evaluation (in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437).

II. TSCA Risk Evaluation

A. What is EPA's risk evaluation process for existing chemicals under
TSCA?

    The risk evaluation process is the second step in EPA's existing
chemical process under TSCA, following prioritization and before risk
management. As this chemical is one of the first ten chemical
substances undergoing risk evaluation, the chemical substance was not
required to go through prioritization (81 FR 91927, December 19, 2016)
(FRL-9956-47). The purpose of conducting risk evaluations is to
determine whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment under the conditions of use,
including an unreasonable risk to a relevant potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulation. As part of this process, EPA must evaluate
both hazard and exposure, not consider costs or other nonrisk factors,
use reasonably available information and approaches in a manner that is
consistent with the requirements in TSCA for the use of the best
available science, and ensure decisions are based on the weight of
scientific evidence.
    The specific risk evaluation process that EPA has established by
rule to implement the statutory process is set out in 40 CFR part 702
and summarized on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluations-existing-chemicals-under-tsca. As explained in the preamble to EPA's final rule on
procedures for risk evaluation (82 FR 33726, July 20, 2017) (FRL-9964-
38), the specific regulatory process set out in 40 CFR part 702,
subpart B is being followed for the first ten chemical substances
undergoing risk evaluation to the maximum extent practicable.
    Prior to the publication of this final risk evaluation, a draft
risk evaluation was subject to peer review and public comment. EPA
reviewed the report from the peer review committee and public comments
and has amended the risk evaluation in response to these comments as
appropriate. The public comments, peer review report, and EPA's
response to comments is in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0437. Prior to the
publication of the draft risk evaluation, EPA made available the scope
and problem formulation, and solicited public input on uses and
exposure. EPA's documents and the public comments are in Docket EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2016-0732. Additionally, information about the scope, problem
formulation, and draft risk evaluation phases of the TSCA risk
evaluation for this chemical is at http://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-methylene-chloride-0.

B. What is methylene chloride?

    Methylene chloride (MC), also known as dichloromethane and DCM, is
a volatile chemical used as a solvent in a wide range of industrial,
commercial and consumer applications. The primary uses for methylene
chloride are for paint removal, adhesives, metal cleaning, aerosol
solvents, chemical processing and flexible polyurethane foam
manufacturing. Information from the 2016 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR)
for MC indicates the reported production volume is more than 260
million lbs per year (manufacture and import).

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: June 17, 2020.
Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-13581 Filed 6-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53168-53169]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21700]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket No. FEMA-2015-0001; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1524]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency; DHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: On July 17, 2015, FEMA published in the Federal Register a
proposed flood hazard determination notice that contained an erroneous
table. This notice provides corrections to that table, to be used in
lieu of the information published at 80 FR 42523. The table provided
here represents the proposed flood hazard determinations and
communities affected for Jackson County, Missouri, and Incorporated
Areas.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before December 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and where
applicable, the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for each community
are available for inspection at both the online location and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the table below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
www.msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1524, to
Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER> or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed in the table below, in
accordance with Section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of
1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP may only be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at http://floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_fact_sheet.pdf.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the table below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard determinations shown on the Preliminary FIRM and
FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR
67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations will also be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
are made final.

Correction

    In the proposed flood hazard determination notice published at 80
FR 42523 in the July 17, 2015, issue of the Federal Register, FEMA
published a table titled ``Jackson County, MO, and Incorporated
Areas''. This table contained inaccurate information as to the
community map repository for the City of Kansas City featured in the
table.
    In this document, FEMA is publishing a table containing the
accurate information. The information provided below should be used in
lieu of that previously published for the City of Kansas City.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: August 10, 2015.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Jackson County, MO, and Incorporated Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maps Available for Inspection Online at: http://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata preliminaryfloodhazarddata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Project: 07-07-0023S Preliminary Date: October 10, 2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Kansas City....................  City Hall, Planning and
                                          Development, 414 East 12th
                                          Street, 15th Floor, Kansas
                                          City, MO 64106.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-21700 Filed 9-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50363-50367]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20778]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0348; FRL-10000-09-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Connecticut; Regional Haze Five Year Progress
Report

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the Connecticut regional haze progress report submitted as a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision on June 30, 2015. This
revision addresses the provisions of the Clean Air Act and its
implementing regulations that require states to submit periodic reports
describing progress on reasonable progress goals established for
regional haze and a determination of adequacy of the state's existing
regional haze SIP. Connecticut's progress report notes that Connecticut
has made substantial progress toward meeting the emissions reduction
expected for the first regional planning period. The report also notes
that visibility in the federal Class I areas that may be affected by
emissions from Connecticut is improving. In addition, the nearby
federal Class I areas have already met the applicable reasonable
progress goals for 2018. The EPA is proposing approval of Connecticut's
determination that the state's existing regional haze SIP requires no
further substantive revision at this time in order to achieve the goals
for visibility improvement and emission reductions.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2019-0348 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, 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, please contact
the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1 Regional Office, Office of Air and Radiation, Air Quality
Branch, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that
if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne K. McWilliams, Air Quality
Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109--3912,
tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
II. EPA's Evaluation of Connecticut's SIP Revision
    A. Regional Haze Progress Report
    B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    States are required to submit a progress report in the form of a
SIP revision that evaluates progress towards the reasonable progress
goals (RPGs) for each mandatory Class I federal area \1\ (Class I area)
within the state and each Class I area outside the state which may be
affected by emissions from within the state [40 CFR 51.308(g)]. In
addition, the provisions of 40 CFR 51.308(h) require states to submit,
at the same time as the 40 CFR 51.308(g) progress report, a
determination of adequacy of the state's existing regional haze SIP.
The progress report SIP for the first planning period is due five years
after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. On November 19, 2009,
Connecticut submitted the state's first regional haze SIP in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.308.\2\ On June 30, 2015, Connecticut submitted, as a
revision to its SIP, a progress report which details the progress made
in the first planning period toward the implementation of the Long Term
Strategy (LTS) outlined in the 2009 regional haze submittal, the
visibility improvement measured at Class I areas that may be affected
by emissions from Connecticut, and a determination of the adequacy of
the state's existing regional haze SIP. The EPA is proposing to approve
Connecticut's June 30, 2015 submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Areas designated as mandatory Class I federal areas consist
of national parks exceeding 6,000 acres, wilderness areas and
national memorial parks exceeding 5,000 acres, and all international
parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7472(a)).
Listed at 40 CFR part 81, subpart D.
    \2\ On April 26, 2013, EPA approved the Connecticut regional
haze SIP submittal. See 79 FR 39322, July 10, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Evaluation of Connecticut's SIP Revision

    Connecticut submitted a SIP revision that contained a report on
progress made in the first implementation period toward reasonable
progress goals for all Class I areas that may be affected by emissions
from sources in the state (also known as a regional haze five-year
progress report). This progress report SIP submittal also included a
determination that the state's existing regional haze SIP requires no
further substantive revisions at this time in order to achieve the
established goals for visibility improvement and emissions reductions
for 2018. Connecticut is a member of the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast
Visibility Union (MANE-VU).\3\ The MANE-VU area contains seven Class I
areas in four states: Moosehorn Wilderness Area, Acadia National Park,
and Roosevelt Campobello International Park in Maine; Presidential
Range/Dry River Wilderness Area and Great Gulf Wilderness Area in New
Hampshire; Brigantine Wilderness Area in New Jersey; and Lye Brook
Wilderness Area in Vermont. There are no Class I areas in Connecticut.
Through source apportionment modeling, MANE-VU assisted states in
determining their contribution to the visibility impairment of each
Class I area in the MANE-VU region and nearby Class I areas outside of
MANE-VU.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ MANE-VU is a collaborative effort of the state governments,
Tribal governments, and various federal agencies established to
initiate and coordinate activities associated with the management of
regional haze, visibility and other air quality issues in the
Northeastern United States. Member state and tribal governments
include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Penobscot Indian Nation, Rhode Island, St. Regis
Mohawk Tribe and Vermont.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, as a member of MAVE-VU, Connecticut agreed to reduce
emissions by at least the amount obtained by the measures in the
coordinated course of action established by MANE-VU. These strategies,
designed to assure reasonable progress toward preventing any future,
and remedying any existing anthropogenic visibility in the mandatory
Class I areas within the MANE-VU region, are commonly referred to as
the MANE-VU ``ask.'' This request (or ``ask'') includes: a timely
implementation of the best available retrofit technology (BART)
requirements, 90 percent or more reduction in sulfur dioxide
(SO2) at 167 electrical generating units (EGUs or ``units'')
identified by MANE-VU (or comparable alternative measures),\4\ lower
sulfur fuels requirement (with limits specified for each state) and
continued evaluation of other control measures.\5\ In brief,
Connecticut is on track to fulfill the MANE-VU ``ask'' by implementing
the lower sulfur fuels strategy and adopting and implementing an
alternative to BART.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Connecticut was not found to have any of the MANE-VU
identified 167 EGU stacks.
    \5\ The MANE-VU ``ask'' was structured around the finding that
SO2 emissions were the dominate visibility impairing
pollutant at Northeastern Class I areas and electrical generating
units comprised the largest SO2 emission sector. See
Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM),
``Regional Haze and Visibility in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic
States'' (January 31, 2001), available at https://www.nescaum.org/documents/regional-haze-and-visibility-in-the-northeast-and-mid-atlantic-states/#.

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

A. Regional Haze Progress Report

    This section includes the EPA's analysis of Connecticut's progress
report SIP submittal and an explanation of the basis of the proposed
approval.
    The 2009 Connecticut regional haze SIP included these key measures:
(1) The adoption of low sulfur fuels requirements for residual and
distillate oil for heating and off-road diesel, and (2) an EGU
alternative to BART. EPA's analysis of the Connecticut regional haze
SIP for the first planning period can be found at 78 FR 5158 (January
24, 2013). Connecticut's low sulfur fuels requirements may be found in
the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) sections 22a-174-
19, 22a-174-19a and 22a-174-19b and Connecticut General Statute (CGS)
section 16a-21a.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 81 FR 33134 (May 25, 2016), 79 FR 39322 (July 10, 2014),
and 81 FR 35626 (July 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rather than implementing BART, Connecticut chose to implement an
alternative to BART that was determined to achieve greater progress
toward natural visibility conditions than BART. The Connecticut
alternative to BART applies not only to the original seven BART units,
but also to an additional 66 units in the state. See 77 FR 17373 (March
26, 2012). Since the 2009 SIP submittal, 15 units have been added to
the alternative to BART program and six units have retired. However,
the 73 alternative to BART units only emitted a total of 1,491 tons of
SO2 in 2014, which is 11.5% of the 13,005 tons of
SO2 from the original 53 units identified as subject to BART
in 2002.\7\ Similarly, for nitrogen oxides (NOX), the
alternative to BART program has achieved a 3,947 ton, or 66%, reduction
in NOX emissions between 2002 and 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The SO2 alternative to BART strategy reduces the
sulfur in fuel oil requirements for subject sources from 0.5% sulfur
residual oil to 0.3% sulfur residual oil. See 77 FR 17373 (March 26,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Connecticut alternative to BART for NOX relies in
large part on non-ozone season NOx limits and Reasonable Available
Control Technology (RACT) determinations. At the time of EPA's
rulemaking on the Connecticut regional haze SIP, the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) was still in effect, and the state's
NOX BART alternative relied, in part, on the ozone season
CAIR. CAIR represented a small part of Connecticut's BART alternative,
and Connecticut's actual ozone season NOX emissions from the
BART alternative sources are currently below the levels contemplated by
CAIR. Additional discussion can be found in the preamble to the EPA's
final approval of the Connecticut's regional haze plan. See 79 FR 39322
(July 10, 2014).
    In August 2011, the federal CAIR program was replaced by the
federal Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). 76 FR 48208 (August 8,
2011). CSAPR did not include Connecticut in its ozone season program
because EPA analyses showed that the state does not emit ozone-season
NOX at a level that contributes significantly to non-
attainment, or interferes with maintenance, of the 1997 ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in any other state. EPA made the
same finding when it promulgated the CSAPR Update for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016).
    While EPA is no longer implementing the ozone-season CAIR,
Connecticut's 2014 total annual NOX emissions from the
alternative to BART sources were 1,954 tons, substantially less than
the previous CAIR ozone-season cap of 2,691 tons NOX. It
should be noted that Connecticut's alternative to BART sources are
still subject to non-ozone season NOX limits and RACT
determinations.
    EPA is proposing approval of Connecticut's determination that the
existing implementation plan requires no further substantive revision
at this time in order to achieve the goals for visibility improvement
and emissions reductions. While Connecticut does not contribute to
visibility impairment in any Class I area, Connecticut is making
progress toward attaining the state's estimated LTS emission
reductions.
    During the development of the regional haze SIP for the first
planning period, MANE-VU and Connecticut determined that SO2
was the greatest contributor to anthropogenic visibility impairment at
nearby Class I areas. Therefore, the bulk of the visibility improvement
achieved in the first planning period was expected to be from the
reductions of SO2 emissions. Table 4.1 of the 2015 progress
report presents data from statewide Connecticut emission inventories
developed for the years 2002, 2008, 2011 and projected inventories for
2018 for SO2, NOX, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs),\8\ and fine particulates with a diameter less than 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5). From 2002 to 2011, the state achieved
an overall 60% reduction in SO2 emissions from 38,534 tons
per year to 15,333 tons per year. Area sources \9\ comprise the largest
portion of the Connecticut SO2 inventory (18,454 tons
SO2 in 2002). While SO2 emission reductions
achieved by 2011 do not meet the projection for 2018, once lower sulfur
home heating oil is fully implemented, we expect additional
SO2 reductions from the area source sector.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ VOCs were not found to contribute substantially to
visibility impairment in the East.
    \9\ An area source means any small residential, governmental,
institutional, commercial, or industrial fuel combustion operations;
onsite solid waste disposal facility; motor vehicles, aircraft
vessels, or other transportation facilities or other miscellaneous
sources identified through inventory techniques similar to those
described in the ``AEROS Manual series, Vol. II AEROS User's
Manual,'' EPA-450/2-76-029 December 1976. See 40 CFR 51.100(l)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For NOX, total emissions were reduced from 115,213 tons
NOX per year to 72,828 tons NOX per year \10\
from 2002 to 2011. For the point source \11\ sector, from 2002 to 2011,
NOX emissions were reduced from 12,868 tons per year to
6,403 tons per year, meeting the 2018 projection of 10,919 tons per
year. While overall NOX reductions achieved by 2011 do not
meet the estimate for 2018, additional reduction is expected to result
from motor vehicle fleet turnover between 2011 and 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The on-road sector is the dominate source of NOX
emissions. In 2011, the on-road sector accounted for 36,659 tons
NOX emissions.
    \11\ A point source is any stationary source in which the actual
emissions are in excess of 100 tons per year of a pollutant in a
region containing an area whose 1980 urban place population was
greater than one million or any stationary source with actual
emissions in excess of 25 tons per year in an area with a 1980 urban
place population less than one million. See 40 CFR 51.100(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, from 2002 to 2011, point source PM2.5 emissions
were reduced from 17,363 tons per year to 16,545 tons per year. While
PM2.5 emissions from area sources increased slightly during
this period, additional reductions are expected with the implementation
of lower sulfur in fuel oil.
    EPA finds that Connecticut has adequately addressed the applicable
provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g). Connecticut compared the most
recently updated emission inventory data available at the time of the
development of the progress report with baseline emissions inventory
data from its regional haze SIP. The progress report adequately details
the 2011 SO2, NOX, and PM2.5
reductions achieved by sector thus far in the regional haze planning
period.
    The provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(g) also require states with
Class I areas within their borders to provide information on current
visibility conditions and on the difference between current visibility
conditions and baseline visibility conditions expressed in terms of
five-year averages of these annual values. Connecticut has

no Class I areas, but the Class I areas that may be affected by
emissions from Connecticut have visibility conditions better than
baseline conditions and conditions predicted for 2018. The Interagency
Visual Environmental monitoring program (IMPROVE) \12\ provides data on
the air pollutants that constitute regional haze. Tables 1 and 2 below
show the progress from the five-year average visibility of the 2000 to
2004 baseline period through the most recent 2009 to 2013 five-year
period for the 20% haziest days and 20% clearest days. Connecticut
concludes that all the included Class I areas are on track to meet the
2018 reasonable progress goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes the substantial improvement in visibility at the MANE-VU
Class I areas. These Class I areas have already met the reasonable
progress goals for the first regional haze planning period.
    In its progress report SIP, Connecticut concludes the elements and
strategies relied on in its original regional haze SIP are adequate to
enable neighboring states to meet all established RPGs.

    Table 1--20% Haziest Days Baseline, Reasonable Progress Goals, and Observed Visibility in deciviews (dv)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                5-Year
                                                  Baseline (2000-   Reasonable        average      Met the 2018
          Class I area  IMPROVE * site                 2004)       progress goal     observed     progress goal?
                                                                      (2018)        (2009-2013)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acadia National Park (ME).......................            22.9            19.4           17.93            Yes.
Brigantine Wilderness (NJ)......................           29.01            25.1           23.75            Yes.
Great Gulf Wilderness (NH)......................            22.8            19.1           16.66            Yes.
Presidential Range-Dry River Wilderness (NH).
Lye Brook Wilderness (VT).......................            24.4            20.9           18.78            Yes.
Moosehorn Wilderness (ME).......................            21.7            19.0           16.83            Yes.
Roosevelt Campobello International Park (ME).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2--20% Cleanest Days Baseline, Reasonable Progress Goals, and Observed Visibility in deciviews (dv)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                5-Year
                                                  Baseline (2000-   Reasonable        average      Met the 2018
          Class I area  IMPROVE * site                 2004)       progress goal     observed     progress goal?
                                                                      (2018)        (2009-2013)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acadia National Park (ME).......................            8.78             8.3            7.02            Yes.
Brigantine Wilderness (NJ)......................           14.33            14.3           12.25            Yes.
Great Gulf Wilderness (NH)......................             7.7             7.2            5.86            Yes.
Presidential Range-Dry River Wilderness (NH).
Lye Brook Wilderness (VT).......................             6.4             5.5             4.9            Yes.
Moosehorn Wilderness (ME).......................             9.2             8.6             6.7            Yes.
Roosevelt Campobello International Park (ME).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data from NESCAUM, Tracking Visibility Progress 2004-2011 (April 30, 2013, rev. May 24, 2014), available at
  http://www.nescaum.org/documents/manevu-trends-2004-2011-report-final-20130430.pdf/.

    EPA proposes to conclude that Connecticut has adequately addressed
the provisions of 40 CFR 51.308(g). The progress report compared the
most recent updated emission inventory data available at the time of
the development of the progress report with the baseline emissions used
in the modeling for the regional haze SIP. In its progress report,
Connecticut described improving visibility trends using data from the
IMPROVE network and the downward emission trend of key pollutants in
the state.
    Connecticut does not have any Class I areas and is not required to
monitor for visibility-impairing pollutants. The Connecticut visibility
monitoring strategy relies upon Class I area participation in the
IMPROVE network. EPA proposes to find that Connecticut has adequately
addressed the requirements for a monitoring strategy for regional haze
purposes to determine no further modifications to the monitoring
program are necessary.

B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan

    In its progress report, Connecticut submitted a negative
declaration to EPA regarding the need for additional actions or
emission reductions in Connecticut beyond those already in place and
those to be implemented by 2018 as detailed in the state's regional
haze plan.
    In the 2015 progress report submittal, Connecticut determined that
the existing regional haze SIP needs no further substantive revision at
this time to achieve the emission reductions expected for the first
planning period. Emission reduction trends are on track to meet
Connecticut's estimated 2018 emissions. Connecticut is implementing
non-ozone season NOX limits, revised RACT, and low sulfur
fuel requirements. The state continues to evaluate additional
NOX control strategies; however, the 2011 total alternative
to BART annual NOX emission of 1,602 tons was well below the
now defunct CAIR ozone season cap of 2,691 tons NOX.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Connecticut has adequately addressed
the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) because visibility trends at
nearby Class I areas and Connecticut emission trends are on track to
meet the goals for the first regional haze planning period. Therefore,
no substantive revisions to the SIP are needed at this time to ensure
that Connecticut meets its share of visibility improvement included in
the downwind states' reasonable progress goals.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Connecticut's June 30, 2015
determination that the existing

implementation plan requires no further substantive revision at this
time in order to achieve established goals for visibility improvement
and emissions reductions. EPA is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant matters. These
comments will be considered before taking final action. Interested
parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by
submitting written comments to this proposed rule by following the
instructions listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory
action because this action is not significant under Executive Order
12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Regional Haze, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 19, 2019.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2019-20778 Filed 9-24-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 121 (Thursday, June 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36914-36916]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15754]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0077; FRL-9323-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) Program (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that the following
Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a
request to renew an existing approved collection. The ICR, which is
abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection
and its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0077 to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail
to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Fiffer, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Alternatives and Emissions Reduction Branch, Mail
Code 6205J, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On January 31, 2011, 76 FR 5366, EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0077, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation
Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-
1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-
566-1742.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program (Renewal)
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1596.08, OMB Control No. 2060-0226.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on June 30,
2011. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or
sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending
at OMB. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: Information collected under this rulemaking is necessary
to implement the requirements of the Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program for evaluating and regulating substitutes for
ozone-depleting chemicals being phased out under the stratospheric
ozone protection provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and globally
under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.
Under CAA Section 612, EPA is authorized to identify and restrict the
use of substitutes for class I and class II ozone-depleting substances
where EPA determines other alternatives exist that reduce overall risk
to human health and the environment. The SNAP program, based on
information collected from the manufacturers, formulators, and/or
sellers of such substitutes, identifies acceptable substitutes.
Responses to the collection of information are mandatory under Section
612 for anyone who sells or, in certain cases, uses substitutes for an
ozone-depleting substance after April 18, 1994, the effective date of
the final rule. Measures to protect confidentiality of information
collected under the SNAP program are based on EPA's confidentiality
regulations (40 CFR 2.201 et seq., or Subpart B). Submitters may
designate all or portions of their forms or petitions as confidential.
EPA requires the submitters to substantiate their claim of
confidentiality. Under CAA Section 114(c), emissions information may
not be claimed as confidential.
    To develop the lists of acceptable and unacceptable substitutes,
the Agency must assess and compare ``overall risks to human health and
the environment'' posed by use of substitutes in the context of
particular applications. EPA requires submission of information
covering a wide range of health and environmental factors. These
include intrinsic properties such as physical and chemical information,
ozone depleting potential, global warming potential, toxicity, and
flammability, and use-specific data such as substitute applications,
process description, environmental release data, exposure data during
use of a substitute, environmental fate and transport, and cost
information. Once a completed submission has been received, a 90 day
review period under the SNAP program will commence. Any substitute
which is a new chemical must also be submitted to the Agency through a
Premanufacture Notice under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Alternatives that will be used as sterilants must be filed jointly with
EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs and with SNAP.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: manufacturers, importers,
formulators and processors of substitutes for ozone-depleting
substances.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 221.
    Frequency of Response: Annual.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 6,683.

    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $476,742, which includes $22,281
annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 1,521 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This is due to changes in EPA's estimates of the
burden hours and number of respondents fulfilling reporting and record-
keeping requirements.
    The development of new substitutes resulted in a greater number of
persons filing a SNAP Information Notice or TSCA/SNAP Addendum to
increase slightly, but also resulted in fewer respondents keeping
records for alternatives that are subject to use conditions or narrowed
use limits. In addition, respondents filing a SNAP Information Notice
reported a decrease in total annual burden of hours when collecting
data to complete the form and when responding to requests for
additional information. This decrease may be attributable to increased
respondent familiarity with EPA's forms, more examples in the public
record for respondents to research and use in preparing responses, and
general increased availability of computer software and information via
the Internet.

    Dated: June 16, 2011.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-15754 Filed 6-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: April 9, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 67)]
[Notices]
[Page 17545]
[DOCID:fr09ap07-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-272-064]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Negotiated Rates

April 3, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Northern Natural Gas Company
(Northern) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets proposed to be
effective on April 1, 2007:

48 Revised Sheet No. 66
40 Revised Sheet No. 66A
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 66B
First Revised Sheet No. 66B.01

    Northern also requests to change the name of WPS Energy Services,
Inc. to Integrys Energy Services, Inc. as a result of the company
changing its name.
    Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed
to each of its customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-6574 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 250 (Tuesday, December 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72353-72354]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28257]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

    Docket Number: PR20-6-001.
    Applicants: Pelico Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Pelico Pipeline,
LLC Revised SOC Effective February 1, 2020 to be effective 2/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>21.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/20.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/20.

    Docket Number: PR20-7-001.
    Applicants: Regency Intrastate Gas LP.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b),(e)+(g): Regency
Intrastate Gas LP Revised SOC Effective February 1, 2020 to be
effective 2/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>27.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/20.
    284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-63-001.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: ETNG RP19-63 Refund Report_Final.
    Filed Date: 12/13/19.
    Accession Number: 20191213-5221.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-423-002.
    Applicants: Tallgrass Interstate Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Rate Case Settlement RP19-423 et al.
to be effective 6/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/17/19.
    Accession Number: 20191217-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/30/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-369-003.
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing First Annual Net Retrograde Filing
on 12/19/19.
    Filed Date: 12/19/19.
    Accession Number: 20191219-5095.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-315-001.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Equitrans Clean-Up Filing--December
2019 Clarification to be effective 1/5/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/19/19.
    Accession Number: 20191219-5023.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-1340-002.
    Applicants: Viking Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Compliance filing Motion to Place Suspended Revised
Tariff Record into Effect to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5337.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-232-001.
    Applicants: Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP.
    Description: Compliance filing DECP--RP20-232 Compliance Filing to
be effective 12/15/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5162.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-309-001.
    Applicants: Northwest Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amended Miscellaneous and
Housekeeping Filing--Fall 2019 to be effective 1/3/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5306.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-351-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate--Chevron
911109 release eff 1-1-2020 to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-352-000.
    Applicants: WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 2019 Negotiated & Non-
Conforming SA--Demick's Lake II to be effective 2/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-353-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 122019 Negotiated Rates--
Castleton Commodities Merchant Trading L.P. H-4010-89 to be effective
12/19/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5004.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-354-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.

    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate--Colonial
911723 eff 12-21-19 to be effective 12/21/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5014.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-355-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 2019 Pro Forma Agreements to
be effective 2/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5016.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: RP20-356-000.
    Applicants: Adelphia Gateway, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Adelphia Tariff Compliance
filing (12-20-19) to be effective 1/3/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/20/19.
    Accession Number: 20191220-5331.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/27/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified date(s). Protests may be considered,
but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 23, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-28257 Filed 12-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P