[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 236 (Monday, December 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63498-63499]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26692]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2018-0758, FRL-9987-62-OLEM]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Part B Permit Application, Permit Modifications, and
Special Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit the information collection request (ICR), Part B Permit
Application, Permit Modifications, and Special Permits (EPA ICR No.
1573.14, OMB Control No. 2050-0009) to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Before doing so, the EPA
is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection as described below. This is a proposed extension
of the ICR, which is currently approved through May 31, 2019. 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.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 8, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OLEM-2018-0758, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Vyas, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate 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; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. The EPA will consider the comments received
and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be
submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, the EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the
ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: Section 3005 of Subtitle C of RCRA requires treatment,
storage or disposal facilities (TSDFs) to obtain a permit. To obtain
the permit, the TSDFs must submit an application describing the
facility's operation. There are two parts to the RCRA permit
application--Part A and Part B. Part A defines the processes to be used
for treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes; the design
capacity of such processes; and the specific hazardous wastes to be
handled at the facility. Part B requires detailed site-specific
information such as geologic, hydrologic, and engineering data. In the
event that permit modifications are proposed by the applicant or the
EPA, modifications must conform to the requirements under Sections 3004
and 3005.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are private sector and State, Local, or Tribal governments.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (RCRA Section 3005).
    Estimated number of respondents: 159.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 24,926 hours per year. Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $7,901,274 (per year), which includes
$2,165,627 in annualized labor and $5,735,647 in annualized capital or
operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: The burden hours are likely to stay
substantially the same.

    Dated: November 29, 2018.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2018-26692 Filed 12-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 23, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 162)]
[Notices]
[Page 51867-51869]
[DOCID:fr23au10-136]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62726; File No. SR-NSCC-2010-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change To Enhance the
Process for Transfers Through the Automated Customer Account Transfer
Service

August 16, 2010.

I. Introduction

    On June 4, 2010, National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') proposed rule change SR-NSCC-2010-05 pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on July 2, 2010.\2\ No comment letters were received on the
proposal. This order approves the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62385 (June 25, 2009),
75 FR 38579 (July 2, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    NSCC's Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (``ACATS'')
system enables Members to effect automated transfers of customer
accounts among themselves.\3\ For ACATS transfers processed through
NSCC's Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') system,\4\ long and short
positions are passed against Members' positions at The Depository Trust
Company (``DTC'') and available securities are delivered from short
Members' accounts at DTC and allocated to long Members' accounts by
book-entry movements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ACATS complements a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority
(``FINRA'') rule requiring FINRA members to use automated clearing
agency customer account transfer services and to effect customer
account transfers within specified time frames.
    \4\ CNS is an ongoing accounting system which nets today's
settling trades with yesterday's closing positions to produce a net
short or long position for a particular security for a particular
Member. NSCC is the counter party for all positions. The positions
are then passed against the Member's designated depository positions
and available securities are allocated by book-entry. This
allocation of securities is accomplished through an evening cycle
followed by a day cycle. Positions which remain open after the
evening cycle may be changed as a result of trades accepted for
settlement that day. CNS allocates deliveries in both the night and
day cycles using an algorithm based on priority groups in descending
order, age of position within a priority group, and random numbers
within age groups.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NSCC is making changes to its ACATS system in connection with a

concurrent rule change by DTC \5\ and is making these changes for two
reasons. First, NSCC believes the changes will enhance protection for
customer securities in ACATS transfers so that customer account
transfers to new firms will be maximized in the event of a Member
failure. Accordingly, NSCC will modify its ACATS processing and its
Rules so that deliveries or receives processed through CNS will satisfy
a Member's ACATS receive or deliver obligations prior to satisfying
other CNS-related obligations of that Member in the same security. NSCC
will also track CNS ACATS items to prevent reversals of completed
transfers in the event of a Member's failure. Second, NSCC believes the
changes will facilitate compliance by its Members with their securities
possession and control requirements.\6\ To that end, NSCC will modify
its Rules to clarify that in no event does NSCC have a lien on
securities that are carried by a Member for the account of its
customers and that are delivered through the CNS ACATS service.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ File No. SR-DTC-2010-09. Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 62384 (June 25, 2010), 75 FR 38581 (July 2, 2010) and 62385
(June 25, 2009), 75 FR 38579 (July 2, 2010).
    \6\ Commission Rule 15c3-3 provides that a broker-dealer shall
promptly obtain and shall thereafter maintain the physical
possession or control of all fully paid securities and excess margin
securities carried for the account of customers. 17 CFR 240.15c3-3.
    \7\ DTC's Settlement Service Guide currently provides that
securities delivered to a receiving DTC Participant's account from
CNS are classified as collateral which may otherwise be made
available to NSCC in the event that the DTC Participant fails to
meet its NSCC settlement obligation. Pursuant to the concurrent DTC
rule change, DTC will revise its Service Guide to provide that ACATS
deliveries from CNS will be designated by the DTC Participant as
minimum amount securities when credited to the Participant's
account. This designation will prevent the securities from being
designated as collateral for either this purpose or for purposes of
DTC's Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. ACATS Transfers Through the CNS System

    Through ACATS, an NSCC Member to which a customer's securities
account is to be transferred (``Receiving Member'') submits a Transfer
Initiation Request to initiate the account transfer process. NSCC
causes all CNS-eligible items in that customer account to enter NSCC's
CNS accounting operation on the day before settlement date unless the
Receiving Member notifies NSCC that certain items should be withheld
from CNS processing.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ NSCC Rule 50 (Automated Customer Account Transfer Service).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ordinary CNS items enter the system at contract value, but ACATS
items enter CNS unvalued. This reflects the nature of the ACATS CNS
items as ``free'' transfers. To incentivize deliveries, ACATS items are
marked-to-the-market on the morning of settlement date using their full
CNS value as of the prior day's closing price. Consequently, the
Delivering Member's CNS projection report shows a short securities
position, and its CNS cash reconciliation report shows a cash debit for
the ``full value'' mark. Conversely, the Receiving Member's projection
report shows a long securities position, and its cash reconciliation
report shows a cash credit equal to the ``full value'' mark. If the
Delivering Member fulfills its ACATS delivery obligation, then its
short position is cancelled, and the cash debit for the mark is offset
by a cash credit. Likewise, upon receipt of the securities by the
Receiving Member, the Receiving Member's long position is offset, and
the cash credit for the mark is offset by the cash debit. The net
result is a ``free'' transfer of securities because no money is paid by
either the Delivering Member or Receiving Member.
    For transactions processed through CNS, NSCC normally becomes the
counter party to the transaction and guarantees settlement.\9\ However,
CNS ACATS transfers are not guaranteed. If a party fails to pay any
portion of its money settlement obligation on settlement Date,\10\ NSCC
may reverse uncompleted ACATS items and any associated debits or
credits calculated using the marking process described above would be
eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Pursuant to Addendum K of its Rules, NSCC generally
guarantees the completion of Continuous Net Settlement (``CNS'') and
Balance Order trades that reach the later of midnight of T+1 or
midnight of the day they are reported to Members. Shortened process
trades, such as same-day and next-day settling trades, are
guaranteed upon comparison or trade recording processing.
    \10\ This includes failure by a Member to pay a mark-to-market
charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ACATS transfers settled through CNS are fungible with all other CNS
activity. The CNS system does not distinguish between ACATS
transactions and other transactions, which means that CNS ACATS
receives and delivers are netted with guaranteed settling trades in the
same securities. However, NSCC will now begin tracking ACATS receive
and deliver obligations in CNS, and CNS allocations will be applied to
ACATS receive and deliver obligations for a Member in a security before
satisfying another obligation in the same security. At the end of each
processing day, CNS ACATS fails will continue to be marked to the full-
market value and netted with all other CNS obligations under NSCC's
Rules.
    In the event of a Member failure, NSCC will use this automated
tracking capability to differentiate between completed and uncompleted
CNS ACATS transactions. NSCC will therefore be able to reverse
uncompleted ACATS transfers of a failing Member while allowing assets
associated with completed ACATS transfers to remain with the Receiving
Member. NSCC believes this will help maximize CNS-related transfers of
customer accounts to new firms.
    An ACATS transfer of a failing Member will be deemed uncompleted if
the failing Member is a Delivering Member and it has failed to deliver
to CNS all or a portion of the securities associated with the ACATS
transfer. If the failing Member is a Receiving Member and it has failed
to receive all or a portion of the securities associated with the ACATS
transfer from CNS, then the transfer will likewise be deemed
uncompleted. In either case, if the Delivering Member makes a partial
delivery of securities to CNS then the transfer will be deemed
completed for the amount of securities received from CNS by the
Receiving Member to the extent that amount does not exceed the amount
delivered to CNS by the Delivering Member. The transfer will be deemed
uncompleted as to any remaining securities beyond that amount, and only
the uncompleted portion of the transfer will be subject to reversal.
Transfers will also be deemed uncompleted when the failing Member is
the Delivering Member and it has a flat or overall long CNS position or
when the failing member is the Receiving Member and it has a flat or
overall short CNS position.
    In the event a Delivering Member and Receiving Member fail on the
same settlement day and have an ACATS transfer obligation between them,
any transfer deemed uncompleted for the Delivering Member will also be
deemed uncompleted for the Receiving Member. NSCC will notify the
affected Members of the details associated with the assets subject to
the reversal, and the affected Members will have to reestablish
customer positions accordingly.

2. Possession and Control Requirements

    To facilitate the compliance of Members with their securities
possession and control requirements of securities subject to ACATS
transfers processed through CNS, NSCC will modify its Rules to clarify
that it does not maintain a lien over ACATS assets delivered to a
Receiving Member through CNS.

3. Amendments to Rules and Procedures

    To provide for the modifications to ACATS described in this order,
NSCC

will amend its rules as described in the summaries below.
a. Rule 18 (Procedures for When [the Corporation] Declines or Ceases To
Act)
    Section 7 of Rule 18 provides that NSCC maintains a lien on all
property placed in its possession by a Member as security for any and
all liabilities of that Member to NSCC. An exception to this rule is
where such a lien would be prohibited under Commission Rules 8c-1 and
15c2-1. NSCC will modify the section to clarify that it does not
maintain a lien on ACATS assets that have been delivered to a Receiving
Member through CNS.
b. Rule 50 (ACATS)
    NSCC will amend Rule 50 to clarify that NSCC may reverse
uncompleted ACATS obligations when either the Delivering or Receiving
Member has failed to meet its settlement obligation to NSCC. In
addition, this Rule will be revised to note that in the event of such a
reversal of uncompleted CNS ACATS obligations, NSCC will make files
available to each Member to show each open security position due to
settle that day that is subject to the reversal as well as such other
information as NSCC may deem advisable. NSCC will also make a technical
correction to clarify that ACATS transactions enter the CNS Accounting
Operation on the day before Settlement Date (SD-1) rather than the day
after Trade Date (T+1).
c. Procedure VII (CNS Accounting Operation)
    NSCC will modify Procedure VII to provide for the tracking of
customer transfers by stating that deliveries of a particular security
through CNS will be used to satisfy a Member's ACATS receive and
deliver obligations before being used to satisfy another obligation,
such as a trade-related obligation of that Member. In addition, the
modified language will indicate that this designation will be provided
to the Member's Designated Depository to facilitate its processing of
the item.

4. Implementation

    NSCC intends to implement these changes during the third quarter of
2010 and will advise Members of the implementation date through
issuance of NSCC Important Notices. NSCC has agreed to provide
Commission staff with updates on at least a quarterly basis on the
progress related to industry discussions for processing enhancements
for non-CNS ACAT transfers.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In connection with its review of ACATS, NSCC has agreed to
provide Commission staff with updates, not less frequently than once
per quarter, of its ongoing cooperative efforts with industry
participants to determine the feasibility of procedures whereby it
will treat ACATS full account transfers uniformly and it will
execute, delete or reverse the transfers consistently for all the
assets in an account whether those assets are CNS-eligible or not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act \12\ and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to NSCC. In particular, the Commission believes
that the changes NSCC is making to its ACATS system to implement a
tracking mechanism to distinguish ACATS activity from other items
processed through CNS and to clarify that NSCC does not maintain a lien
on ACATS assets delivered to a Receiving Member through CNS are
consistent with NSCC's obligations under Section 17A(b)(3)(F),\13\
which requires, among other things, that the rules of a clearing agency
are designed to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act and in
particular with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \14\ and the
rules and regulations thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\15\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NSCC-2010-05) be,
and hereby is, approved.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \16\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-20815 Filed 8-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 3761]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1422]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12848-002, Project No. 14081-000]

FFP Project 6, LLC, Northland Power Mississippi River LLC; Notice
Announcing Filing Priority for Preliminary Permit Applications

    On January 17, 2012, the Commission held a drawing to determine
priority among competing preliminary permit applications with identical
filing times. In the event that the Commission concludes that none of
the applicants' plans are better adapted than the others to develop,
conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water resources of the
region at issue, the priority established by this drawing will serve as
the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, the order of priority is as
follows:
    1. FFP Project 6, LLC; Project No. 12848-002.
    2. Northland Power Mississippi River LLC; Project No. 14081-000.

    Dated: January 18, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1422 Filed 1-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 99 (Thursday, May 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29478-29479]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11829]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC)
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of the ARAC.

DATES: The meeting will be held on June 19, 2014, starting at 2:00 p.m.
Eastern Standard Time. Arrange oral presentations by June 12, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Hyatt Regency Bethesda,
One Bethesda Metro Center (7400 Wisconsin Avenue), Bethesda, MD 20814,
Diplomat/Ambassador Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renee Pocius, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), we are giving notice of a
meeting of the ARAC taking place on June 19, 2014, at the Hyatt Regency
Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center (7400 Wisconsin Avenue), Bethesda,
MD 20814.
    The Agenda includes:

1. Status Reports From Active Working Groups
    a. AC 120-17A Maintenance Control by Reliability Methods (ARAC)
    b. Airman Certification System Working Group (ARAC)
    c. Airworthiness Assurance Working Group (TAE)

    d. Engine Harmonization Working Group (TAE)
    i. Engine Bird Ingestion
    ii. Engine Endurance Testing Requirements--Revision of Section
33.87
    e. Flight Test Harmonization Working Group (TAE)--Phase 2 Tasking
2. New Tasks
3. Status Report from the FAA
4. Charter Renewal
    a. Membership
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to the
space available. Please confirm your attendance with the person listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section no later than June 12,
2014. Please provide the following information: Full legal name,
country of citizenship, and name of your industry association, or
applicable affiliation. If you are attending as a public citizen,
please indicate so.
    For persons participating by telephone, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by email or phone
for the teleconference call-in number and passcode. Callers outside the
Washington metropolitan area are responsible for paying long-distance
charges.
    The public must arrange by June 12, 2014 to present oral statements
at the meeting. The public may present written statements to the
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee by providing 25 copies to the
Designated Federal Officer, or by bringing the copies to the meeting.
    If you are in need of assistance or require a reasonable
accommodation for this meeting, please contact the person listed under
the heading FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Sign and oral
interpretation, as well as a listening device, can be made available if
requested 10 calendar days before the meeting.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 2014.
Lirio Liu,
Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2014-11829 Filed 5-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 112 (Monday, June 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26998-27000]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12520]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0210; FRL-9978-40]

Problem Formulations for the Risk Evaluations To Be Conducted
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act, and General Guiding Principles
To Apply Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations; Notice of
Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is publishing and taking comments on the problem
formulation documents for the first 10 chemical substances undergoing
risk evaluation under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Comments
received will inform the development of draft risk evaluation documents
for these 10 chemical substances. The 10 problem formulation documents
announced in this document refine the scope documents published in June
2017 and are an additional interim step, prior to publication of the
draft risk evaluations. EPA is also publishing and taking comments on a
document entitled: ``Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk
Evaluations,'' which sets out general principles to guide EPA's
application of systematic review for TSCA risk evaluations. The Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) generally intends to apply
systematic review principles in the development of risk evaluations
under TSCA. The systematic review document includes a structured
process of identifying, evaluating and integrating evidence for both
the hazard and exposure assessments developed during the TSCA risk
evaluation process. This document may be revised periodically. EPA
welcomes public input on the document.

DATES: Comments on the problem formulations must be received on or
before July 26, 2018.
    EPA specifically requests comments on the Application of Systematic
Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations document for 45 days after date of
publication in the Federal Register. In addition, because this document
is a living document which may be revised periodically. EPA welcomes
public input on this document at any time.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the appropriate docket
identification (ID) numbers as provided in Unit IV., by one of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When submitting comments, please
be as specific as possible, and please include any supporting data or
other information.
     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for
hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets in general is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information on the Problem Formulation documents
contact: Christina Motilall, Risk Assessment Division, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-1287; email address: [email protected].
    For technical information on Application of Systematic Review in
TSCA Risk Evaluations contact: Iris Camacho, Risk Assessment Division,
Office of Pollution Prevention and

Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address: [email protected].
    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture
(defined under TSCA to include import), process, distribute in
commerce, use or dispose of any of the 10 chemical substances
identified in this document for risk evaluation, or any future existing
chemical substances undergoing risk evaluation under TSCA. This action
may be of particular interest to entities that are regulated under TSCA
(e.g., entities identified under North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes 325 and 324110, among others).
Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not
attempted to describe all the specific entities and corresponding NAICS
codes for entities that may be interested in or affected by this
action.

II. What is the Agency's authority for this action?

    As amended in June 2016, TSCA requires that EPA prioritize and
evaluate existing chemical substances and manage identified risks (15
U.S.C. 2605). TSCA section 6(b) specifies the requirements for risk
evaluation.

III. Background

A. The First 10 Chemical Substances for Risk Evaluations Under TSCA

    On December 19, 2016 (81 FR 91927) (FRL-9956-47), EPA released its
designation of the first 10 chemical substances for risk evaluations
under TSCA. EPA's designation of the first 10 chemical substances
constituted the initiation of the risk evaluation process for each of
these chemical substances, pursuant to the requirements of TSCA section
6(b)(4).
    On June 22, 2017, EPA released scope documents for the first 10
chemical substances (see 82 FR 31592, July 7, 2017) (FRL-9963-57). Each
scope document includes the hazards, exposures, conditions of use, and
the potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations that EPA expects
to consider in the risk evaluation.
    EPA has prepared a Response to Comments document addressing
overarching comments received on the scope documents, which is
available in the docket (see docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0736).
Chemical substance-specific comments on the scope documents are
addressed in the respective problem formulation documents.

B. Systematic Review

    In the development of TSCA risk evaluations, the Agency generally
intends to apply systematic review principles. EPA described systematic
review in the preamble of the final rule Procedures for Chemical Risk
Evaluation Under the Amended Toxic Substances Control Act (82 FR 33726,
July 20, 2017), and in the preamble of the proposed rule (82 FR 7562,
January 19, 2017) (FRL-9957-75). EPA intends to apply systematic review
to pre-specify the criteria, methods/approaches for data collection,
data evaluation and data integration to meet the TSCA science
standards. TSCA requires EPA to make scientific decisions in a manner
consistent with the best available science and base decisions on the
weight of the scientific evidence.
    Supplemental documents to the scope documents of the first 10
chemical substances, published in June 2017 (e.g., Strategy for
Conducting Literature Searches for Asbestos: Supplemental Document to
the TSCA Scope Document, CASRN: 1332-21-4) already document the initial
methods for identifying, compiling and screening publicly available
information. These data collections and screening activities are
described in the Strategy for Conducting Literature Searches document
and the Bibliography document supporting each of the TSCA scope
documents for the first ten chemical substances.

IV. What action is the Agency taking?

A. Problem Formulation Documents

    To refine the scope documents, EPA is publishing and taking public
comment on problem formulation documents for the first 10 chemical
substances. As indicated in the scope documents, time constraints
resulted in scope documents that were not as refined or specific as
future scope documents are anticipated to be. The 10 problem
formulation documents announced in this document are an additional
interim step, prior to publication of the draft risk evaluations, that
refine the scope documents. These refinements may apply to the
conditions of use, hazards, exposures, and the potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulations EPA expects to consider in the risk
evaluation. EPA has incorporated scope document comments specific to
each chemical substance into the respective problem formulation
document. While EPA does not intend to revise these problem formulation
documents, comments and information provided will inform the
development of the draft risk evaluation documents.
    The following table identifies the docket ID numbers and EPA
contact for each of the 10 problem formulations that EPA is taking
comments on.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Chemical No.                              Docket ID No.                        Agency contact
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos............................  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0736                         Robert Courtnage,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
1-Bromopropane......................  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0741                         Ana Corado,
                                                                                [email protected], 202-564-
                                                                                0140.
1,4-Dioxane.........................  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0723                         Cindy Wheeler,
                                                                                [email protected], 202-
                                                                                566-0484.
Carbon Tetrachloride................  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0733                         Stephanie Jarmul,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster      EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0735                         Sue Slotnick,
 (HBCD).                                                                             [email protected], 202-
                                                                                566-1973.
Methylene Chloride..................  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0742                         Ana Corado,
                                                                                [email protected], 202-564-
                                                                                0140.
N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP)...........  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0743                         Ana Corado,
                                                                                [email protected], 202-564-
                                                                                0140.
Pigment Violet 29 (Anthra[2,1,9-      EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0725                         Hannah Braun,
 def:6,5,10-d'e'f'] diisoquinoline-                                                  [email protected], 202-
 1,3,8,10(2H,9H)-tetrone).                                                           564-5614.
Tetrachloroethylene (also known as    EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0732                         Tyler Lloyd,
 perchloroethylene).                                                                 [email protected], 202-
                                                                                564-4016.
Trichloroethylene (TCE).............  EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0737                         Toni Krasnic,
                                                                                [email protected], 202-
                                                                                564-0984.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA invites the public to provide additional comment and
information that would be useful in conducting the risk evaluation for
each of the 10 chemical substances.

B. The Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations

    The Application of Systematic Review in TSCA Risk Evaluations
document is a supplemental publication which sets out general
principles to guide EPA's application of systematic review in the risk
evaluation process for the first 10 chemical substances that EPA
initiated on December 19, 2016, as well as future assessments. It also
provides the intended strategy for assessing the quality of information
that the Agency plans to use for the TSCA risk evaluations.
    The Agency intends to implement a structured process of
identifying, evaluating and integrating evidence for both the hazard
and exposure assessments developed during the TSCA risk evaluation
process. As needed, EPA will develop new approaches and methods to
address specific assessment needs for the relatively large and diverse
chemical space under TSCA. Hence, the Agency will document the progress
of implementing systematic review in the draft risk evaluations and
through revisions of this document and publication of supplemental
documents. The systematic review document provides the general
expectations for evidence integration. Further additional information
will be published with the publication of the draft TSCA risk
evaluations.
    Ultimately, the goal is to establish a pragmatic systematic review
process that generates high quality, fit-for-purpose risk evaluations
that rely on the best available science and the weight of the
scientific evidence within the context of TSCA.
    This document is a living document which may be revised
periodically. EPA welcomes public input on this document at any time.

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

    Dated: May 31, 2018.
Charlotte Bertrand,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-12520 Filed 6-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15751-15752]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6423]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9648-2]

Meetings of the Local Government Advisory Committee and the Small
Communities Advisory Subcommittee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS) will meet
via teleconference on Tuesday, March 27, 2012, 2 p.m.-3 p.m. (ET), and
the SCAS will meet at EPA's Region 8 office in Denver, CO, on Thursday,
April 18, 2012, 3 p.m.-5 p.m. (MT). The Subcommittee will discuss
decentralized wastewater treatment and other issues and recommendations
to the Administrator regarding environmental issues affecting small
communities. These are open meetings, and all interested persons are
invited to participate. The Subcommittee will hear comments from the
public during the teleconference on Tuesday, March 27, 2012 between
2:50 p.m. and 3 p.m. (ET) and during the meeting on Thursday, April 18,
2012 between 4:45 p.m. and 5 p.m. (MT). Individuals or organizations
wishing to address the Subcommittee will be allowed a maximum of five
minutes to present their point of view. Also, written comments should
be submitted electronically to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please contact
the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the number listed below to
schedule a time on the agenda. Time will be allotted on a first-come
first-serve basis, and the total period for comments may be extended if
the number of requests for appearances requires it.
    The Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) will meet at EPA's
Region 8 office in Denver, CO, on Thursday, April 19, 2012, 10 a.m.-
4:15 p.m. (MT), and Friday, April 20, 2012, 9 a.m.-12 p.m. (MT). The
Committee will discuss integrated water quality planning, hydraulic
fracturing, air quality issues and environmental justice

and Title VI. This is an open meeting and all interested persons are
invited to participate. The Committee will hear comments from the
public between 4 p.m.-4:15 p.m. (MT) on Thursday, April 19, 2012.
Individuals or organizations wishing to address the Committee will be
allowed a maximum of five minutes to present their point of view. Also,
written comments should be submitted electronically to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please contact the Designated Federal Officer
(DFO) at the number listed below to schedule a time on the agenda. Time
will be allotted on a first-come first-serve basis, and the total
period for comments may be extended if the number of requests for
appearances requires it.

ADDRESSES: The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee and Local
Government Advisory Committee meetings will be held at U.S. EPA Region
8 Office, 1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, CO 80202-1129. [Meeting summaries
will be available after the meeting online at www.epa.gov/ocir/scas_lgac/lgac_index.htm and can be obtained by written request to the
DFO].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Local Government Advisory Committee
(LGAC) contact Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For the Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee
(SCAS), contact Cathy Davis, Designated Federal Officer at (202) 564-
2703 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Information On Services for Those With Disabilities: For
information on access or services for individuals with disabilities,
please contact Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a disability,
please request it 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much
time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: March 7, 2012.
Frances Eargle,
Designated Federal Officer, Local Government Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2012-6423 Filed 3-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 205 (Friday, October 23, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64344-64346]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26935]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0337; FRL-9936-05-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida;
Regional Haze Plan Amendment--Lakeland Electric C.D. McIntosh

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing
approval of the State of Florida's March 10, 2015, State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revision, submitted by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP). This submittal fulfills Florida's
commitment to EPA to provide a regional haze SIP revision with a Best
Available Retrofit Technology (BART) nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions
limit for Unit 1 at the Lakeland Electric--C.D. McIntosh Power Plant
(McIntosh) reflecting best operating practices for good combustion.
States are required to address the BART provisions of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) and EPA's

regional haze regulations as part of a program to prevent any future
and remedy any existing anthropogenic impairment of visibility in
mandatory Class I areas (national parks and wilderness areas) caused by
emissions of air pollutants from numerous sources located over a wide
geographic area (also referred to as the ``regional haze program'') and
to assure reasonable progress toward the national goal of achieving
natural visibility conditions in Class I areas. In this action, EPA is
approving the BART NOx emissions limit for Unit 1 at McIntosh into the
Florida SIP.

DATES: This rule is effective November 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0337. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person 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 Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On December 10, 2012, EPA proposed to approve the BART and
reasonable progress determinations for a number of EGUs in Florida as
part of Florida's regional haze SIP. See 77 FR 73369. In that action,
EPA proposed approval of Florida's BART determination for emissions
Units 1 and 2 at McIntosh found subject to BART. On August 29, 2013,
EPA issued a final, full approval of Florida's regional haze SIP. See
78 FR 53250. In that final action, EPA approved the BART determination
for the McIntosh facility, including the determination that the
existing level of control for NOx at Unit 1, best operating practices
for good combustion, is the NOx BART control for Unit 1. See 78 FR
53263. As described in the August 29, 2013, final action, FDEP
submitted a letter to EPA dated July 30, 2013, in which the State
committed to provide EPA with a regional haze SIP revision no later
than March 19, 2015, the deadline for the State's five-year regional
haze periodic progress report SIP, that would include a NOx BART
emissions limit for Unit 1 reflecting best operating practices for good
combustion. FDEP also committed to modify the title V permit for
McIntosh to include this new limit.
    To fulfill its commitment in accordance with the July 30, 2013
letter, the State of Florida submitted a SIP revision dated March 10,
2015, revising the State's regional haze SIP to include a NOx BART
emissions limit for McIntosh Unit 1 and a construction permit (FDEP
Permit No. 1050004-034-AC) dated April 30, 2014, for Unit 1 containing
this limit. The permit contains supporting conditions (e.g., monitoring
requirements) and a condition specifying a schedule for McIntosh to
apply for a revision to its title V permit to reflect the new permit
conditions.
    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) published on August 20,
2015, EPA proposed to approve Florida's March 10, 2015, regional haze
SIP revision fulfilling the State's July 20, 2013, commitment to
provide EPA with a SIP revision containing a NOx BART emissions limit
for McIntosh Unit 1 reflecting best operating practices for good
combustion and conditions to modify the title V permit to incorporate
this limit. See 80 FR 50591. The details of Florida's submittal and the
rationale for EPA's actions are explained in the NPR. Comments on the
proposed rulemaking were due on or before September 21, 2015. No
adverse comments were received.

II. Final Action

    EPA is finalizing approval of the State of Florida's March 10,
2015, SIP revision and revising the regional haze SIP to include the
NOx BART emissions limit for Unit 1 and the April 30, 2014,
construction permit containing this limit. EPA is approving these
changes to the Florida SIP because the submission meets the applicable
regional haze requirements as set forth in the CAA and in EPA's
regional haze regulations and the applicable requirements of section
110 of the CAA.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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 CAA; 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).

    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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 22, 2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 8, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart K--Florida

0
2. Section 52.520(e) is amended by adding an entry for ``Regional Haze
Plan Amendment 3'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Florida Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      State                           Federal Register
           Provision             effective date   EPA approval date        notice              Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Regional Haze Plan Amendment 3.       4/30/2014  10/23/2015........  [Insert Federal     Establishes NOX BART
                                                 [Insert Federal      Register            emissions limit for
                                                  Register            citation].          Unit 1 at the Lakeland
                                                  citation].                              Electric--C.D.
                                                                                McIntosh Power Plant
                                                                                and includes FDEP
                                                                                Permit No. 1050004-034-
                                                                                AC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2015-26935 Filed 10-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 247)]
[Notices]
[Page 76452-76454]
[DOCID:fr27de05-42]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2005-0013; FRL-8015-4]

Notice of Availability of a Petition for Exemption From EPCRA and
CERCLA Reporting Requirements for Ammonia From Poultry Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of data availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a Petition for
Exemption from EPCRA and CERCLA Reporting Requirements for Ammonia from
Poultry Operations that was submitted to the Environmental Protection
Agency on August 5, 2005 by the National Chicken Council, National
Turkey Federation, and U.S. Poultry and Egg Association as nonprofit
member organizations that represent the majority of broiler and turkey
producers across the country. This document is being made available so
that the public will have the opportunity to provide relevant data
regarding this petition. EPA, in accordance with its mission to protect
human health and the environment, will consider the impacts of human
health and the environment in its decision whether to grant or deny
this petition.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 27, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2005-0013, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Superfund Docket, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 5202T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, Room B102, EPA West
Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2005-0013. EPA's policy is that all comments

received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any

personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
http://www.regulations.gov The http://www.regulations.gov. Web site is
an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
 ``For additional instructions on submitting

comments, go to Unit III.A of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Superfund Docket, EPA/DC,

EPA West, Room B102, 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
Superfund Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Interested Entities

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Examples of interested
             Type of entity                          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...............................  Poultry Industry, Owners/
                                          Operators of animal production
                                          operations.
Environmental and Citizen Groups.......  Sierra Club, Environmental
                                          Integrity Project, Local
                                          Citizen Groups.
State/Local/Tribal Government..........  State and Tribal Emergency
                                          Response Commissions, and
                                          Local Emergency Planning
                                          Committees.
Federal................................  National Response Center,
                                          Regional Environmental
                                          Protection Agency Offices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be interested in this
petition. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be interested in this petition. Other types of
entities not listed in the table may also be interested.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at your estimate.
    5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    6. Offer alternatives.
    7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
    8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket
identification number in the subject line on the first page of your
response. It would also be helpful if you provided the name, date, and
Federal Register citation related to your comments.

II. Background

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) section 103(a) requires that any person in
charge of a facility notify the National Response Center (NRC), as soon
as he has knowledge, of the release of a hazardous substance from that
facility in quantities equal to or greater than those determined under
section 102(b) of CERCLA. Those quantities are called the Reportable
Quantities or RQs. Similarly, EPCRA section 304(a) requires that the
local emergency planning committee (LEPC) for any area likely to be
affected, and the State emergency response commission (SERC) of any
State likely to be affected by the release of an extremely hazardous
substance listed under EPCRA Section 302 also be notified. Neither
CERCLA nor EPCRA limit the industry or commercial sectors that need to
report; therefore any facility releasing more than an RQ must report.
With respect to poultry operations, the CERCLA hazardous and EPCRA
extremely hazardous substance most likely to trigger an RQ is ammonia
at 100 pounds per 24 hours. Ammonia may be used at a farm as fertilizer
and thus, is stored in tanks and can be released. However, at poultry
operations, another likely release source of ammonia is from the barns
that contain poultry litter (bedding material that is combined with
deposited manure).
    Hydrogen sulfide is also a CERCLA hazardous and EPCRA extremely
hazardous substance, with an RQ at 100 pounds per 24 hours, which may
be emitted from animal agricultural operations. However, the petition
is silent on hydrogen sulfide.
    On August 5, 2005, the Agency received the subject petition titled,
``Petition for Exemption from EPCRA and CERCLA Reporting Requirements
for Ammonia from Poultry Operations.''

III. Summary of Today's Action

A. What Is the Agency Asking From the Public?

    The Agency believes the petition raises important issues that
require a scientifically-sound basis in order to make a reasoned
decision. The Agency's Office of Science Policy includes on its Web
site, http://www.epa.gov/osp/science.htm, a statement that, ``[s]cience

provides the foundation for credible decision-making. Only through
adequate knowledge about the risks to human health and ecosystems, and
innovative solutions to prevent pollution and reduce risk, can we
continue to enjoy a high quality life. With a better understanding of
environmental risks to people and ecosystems, EPA can target the
hazards that pose the greatest risks and anticipate environmental
problems before they reach a critical level.'' It is appropriate, based
on this policy, that the Agency seeks relevant data so that it can make
a science-based decision regarding this petition.
    As a result the Agency is requesting the public to submit any
relevant data

on the impact of ammonia emissions on public health and the environment
from poultry operations. The Agency is also interested in hearing from
State Emergency Planning Commissions (SERC) and Local Emergency
Planning Committees (LEPCs) about the usefulness of release reports
that are required under EPCRA and its implementing regulations (40 CFR
355--Emergency Planning and Notification).

B. What Efforts Are the Agency Currently Pursuing To Evaluate Emissions
From Poultry Operations?

    Currently, the Agency does not have any reliable data regarding
emissions from the poultry operations industry that it could use to
properly evaluate this petition; however, the Agency is currently
evaluating applications from the animal agricultural industry for
participation in the Agency's Animal Feeding Operations (AFO)/Consent
Agreement and Final Order (CAFO) that will enable the Agency to collect
emissions data from the industry.
    On January 31, 2005, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register
(70 FR 4958) offering animal agricultural operations an opportunity to
sign the voluntary Consent Agreement, which among other things
establishes a monitoring study for emissions at such operations. The
need for the monitoring study was based on a National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) review and evaluation of EPA and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's scientific basis for estimating emissions of various air
pollutants from AFOs. The NAS issued a final report in February, 2003
concluding that scientifically sound and practical protocols for
measuring air emissions from AFOs needed to be developed. The NAS also
found that existing methodologies for estimating air emissions from
AFOs are generally inadequate because of the limited data and site
specific factors on which they are based. In response to the 2003 NAS
report, EPA began revising the conceptual enforcement agreement to
specifically address the data and emission-estimating methodology
needs, thus beginning to address the needs cited by the NAS, and
determining AFO regulatory responsibility under the CAA, CERCLA, and
EPCRA. This resulting monitoring study will lead to the development of
methodologies for estimating emissions from AFOs and will allow
Respondents to determine and comply with their regulatory
responsibilities under the CAA, CERCLA, and EPCRA.
    Once applicable emission-estimating methodologies have been
published by EPA, the liability release in the proposed Agreement is
contingent on the Respondent certifying that it is in compliance with
all relevant requirements of the CAA, CERCLA, and EPCRA. In return,
Respondents receive a release and covenant not to sue for the specific
violations identified by applying the relevant emissions-estimating
methodologies as long as the participating animal agricultural
operations comply with all of their obligations under the Agreement.
    The AFO Air Compliance Agreement is an important part of EPA's
strategy to address air emissions from AFOs. In addition to resolving
the compliance status of AFOs under the relevant statutes, it will
provide critical data that will allow EPA to quantify emissions coming
from AFOs (including poultry operations) and, if necessary, to identify
appropriate regulatory and nonregulatory responses for controlling
those emissions.

C. What Is the Agency Intending To Do With the Scientific Data Received
From the Public?

    The Agency intends to consider the scientific data that it receives
from the public in its evaluation of this petition. Once the Agency has
made its decision it will issue a notice that provides its rationale to
either grant or deny the petition.

    Dated: December 20, 2005.
Thomas P. Dunne,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response.
[FR Doc. E5-7869 Filed 12-23-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 12, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 112)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 27908-27910]
[DOCID:fr12jn09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0523; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-018-AD;
Amendment 39-15934; AD 2009-12-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A340-541 and -642
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Following a refined Finite Element Model (FEM) analysis of the
Nose Landing Gear (NLG) actuator fitting installed on the roof panel
of the NLG box of all A340-500/-600 aircraft, it has been
demonstrated that potential fatigue cracks can be initiated on the
NLG actuator fitting flanges.
    This situation, if not corrected, could lead to inadvertent
extension of the NLG which could adversely affect the aircraft's
continued safe flight or [could result in] failure to retract the
NLG which, in combination with an engine failure, could adversely
affect the aircraft's safe take off.

    This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 29, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of June 29,
2009.
    We must receive comments on this AD by July 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0201, dated November 13, 2008 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Following a refined Finite Element Model (FEM) analysis of the
Nose Landing Gear (NLG) actuator fitting installed on the roof panel
of the NLG box of all A340-500/-600 aircraft, it has been
demonstrated that potential fatigue cracks can be initiated on the
NLG actuator fitting flanges.
    This situation, if not corrected, could lead to inadvertent
extension of the NLG which could adversely affect the aircraft's
continued safe flight or [could result in] failure to retract the
NLG which, in combination with an engine failure, could adversely
affect the aircraft's safe take off.
    To prevent such event, this Airworthiness Directive requires
High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) inspections and detailed visual
inspections on the NLG Actuator fitting to detect any crack and, in
case of finding, mandates the relevant corrective actions.

    Corrective actions include contacting Airbus for repair
instructions and doing the repair. You may obtain further information
by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-5045,
including Appendix 01, dated October 6, 2008. The actions described in
this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    There are no products of this type currently registered in the
United States. However, this rule is necessary to ensure that the
described unsafe condition is addressed if any of these products are
placed on the U.S. Register in the future.

Differences Between the AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the AD.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product,
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
unnecessary.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0523; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-018-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between

the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2009-12-11 Airbus: Amendment 39-15934. Docket No. FAA-2009-0523;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-018-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 29,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model A340-541 and -642
airplanes, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53:
Fuselage.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continued airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    Following a refined Finite Element Model (FEM) analysis of the
Nose Landing Gear (NLG) actuator fitting installed on the roof panel
of the NLG box of all A340-500/-600 aircraft, it has been
demonstrated that potential fatigue cracks can be initiated on the
NLG actuator fitting flanges.
    This situation, if not corrected, could lead to inadvertent
extension of the NLG which could adversely affect the aircraft's
continued safe flight or [could result in] failure to retract the
NLG which, in combination with an engine failure, could adversely
affect the aircraft's safe take off.
    To prevent such event, this Airworthiness Directive requires
High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) inspections and detailed visual
inspections on the NLG Actuator fitting to detect any crack and, in
case of finding, mandates the relevant corrective actions.

    The corrective action includes contacting Airbus for repair
instructions and doing the repair.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) At the applicable time defined in paragraph (f)(1)(i) or
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD: Perform an HFEC inspection on fitting flanges
and a detailed visual inspection of the NLG actuator overall
fitting, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-5045, dated October 6,
2008.
    (i) For weight variant 00x series: Before accumulating 3,920
total flight cycles or within 90 days of the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later.
    (ii) For weight variant 10x series: Before accumulating 3,020
total flight cycles or within 90 days of the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later.
    (2) If no crack is detected during both inspections required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, repeat the inspections thereafter at
intervals not exceeding the interval defined in paragraph (f)(2)(i)
or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) For weight variant 00x series: 1,320 flight cycles.
    (ii) For weight variant 10x series: 2,690 flight cycles.
    (3) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
this AD, before further flight, contact Airbus for repair
instructions and do the repair.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Send information to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC
on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal
maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI),
as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight
Standards District Office.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0201, dated November 13, 2008; and
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-5045, including Appendix
01, dated October 6, 2008; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-53-5045,
including Appendix 01, dated October 6, 2008, to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 2, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-13572 Filed 6-11-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                    Pathways II Rule Phone & E-Mail Log

Includes substantive telephone conversations and e-mails between EPA personnel and non-government stakeholders following signature of the Pathways II Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on June 14, 2013 (separate memos on additional calls/emails have also been docketed individually).

Date
EPA Personnel
Stakeholder
Purpose of Call/E-mail and Topics(s) Discussed
November 2013  -  January 2014
Lauren Rafelski (AAAS Fellow)
Jeffrey Fedenko, University of Florida
Several emails about Fedenko's 2013 paper about grasses grown for bioenergy in Florida
1/6/2014
Lauren Rafelski (AAAS Fellow)
Jack Comstock, USDA
Phone call to discuss different types of energy cane
1/24/2014
Lauren Rafelski (AAAS Fellow)
Anna Hale, USDA
Email about methods of measuring the fiber content of energy cane
1/26/2014
Lauren Rafelski (AAAS Fellow)
Jack Comstock, USDA
Email about methods of measuring the fiber content of energy cane
4/28/2014
Lauren Rafelski (AAAS Fellow)
Paul White, USDA
Email about cellulosic content of energy cane
November 2013  -  January 2014
David Babson (AAAS Fellow)
Cynthia Finley, National Association of Clean Water Agencies
Several emails and informal phone calls regarding data characterizing the solids content of municipal wastewater
January 2014  -  March 2014
David Babson (AAAS Fellow)
John Willis, Brown and Caldwell
Several emails and informal phone calls regarding data characterizing the solids content and treatment of municipal wastewater at facilities producing biogas


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 62 (Monday, April 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 19476]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07494]

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

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: RP13-697-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Negotiated Rate--SW Energy contract 820131 4-1-2013 to
be effective 4/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130322-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-698-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Negotiated Rate--Twin Eagle to be effective 4/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130322-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-699-000.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Comp.
    Description: CEGT LLC--Fuel Tracker Filing Effective May 1, 2013 to
be effective 5/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130322-5056
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-700-000.
    Applicants: Cheyenne Plains Gas Pipeline Company, L.
    Description: Non-Conforming Negotiated Rate Agreement and Points of
Contact Filing to be effective 4/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/22/13.
    Accession Number: 20130322-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/3/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-701-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC
    Description: Revision to Letter Agmts for ENS/EFT Addendums to be
effective 4/25/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/25/13.
    Accession Number: 20130325-5033.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/8/13.

    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.
    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, and service 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 (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: March 25, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-07494 Filed 3-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 141 (Monday, July 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44129-44130]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15812]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2022-D-0810]

Conducting Remote Regulatory Assessments--Questions and Answers;
Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Conducting
Remote Regulatory Assessments--Question and Answers.'' FDA is issuing
the draft guidance to describe the Agency's current thinking regarding
its use of remote regulatory assessments (RRAs) in order to increase
industry's understanding of RRAs and facilitate FDA's process for
conducting RRAs. FDA has used RRAs to conduct oversight, mitigate risk,
meet critical public health needs and help maximize compliance of FDA-
regulated products. This draft guidance provides answers to frequently
asked questions regarding what RRAs are, when and why FDA may use them,
and how FDA may conduct them, among others.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by September 23, 2022 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2022-D-0810 for ``Conducting Remote Regulatory Assessments;
Questions and Answers; Guidance for Industry.'' Received comments will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access

the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Operational Policy, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Food
and Drug Administration, Element Building, 12420 Parklawn Dr.,
Rockville, MD 20852. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
the office in processing your requests. The draft guidance may also be
obtained by email by emailing ORA at [email protected]. See
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the
draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Henderson, Office of
Regulatory Affairs, Food and Drug Administration, Element Building,
12420 Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Ben Firschein,
Office of Regulatory Affairs, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Conducting Remote Regulatory Assessments--Questions and
Answers.'' FDA is issuing the draft guidance to describe the Agency's
current thinking regarding its use of RRAs in order to help increase
industry's understanding of RRAs, thereby facilitating FDA's process
for conducting remote assessments. RRAs include requests for records
and other information for FDA review and interactive evaluations of an
FDA-regulated establishment or product with the use of, for example,
livestreaming video. RRAs can be either voluntary or mandated. FDA has
used RRAs to conduct oversight, mitigate risk, meet critical public
health needs, and help maximize compliance with applicable FDA
requirements, for all types of FDA-regulated products.
    For example, during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
pandemic, FDA has used RRAs to inform approval and licensing decisions,
verify corrective actions for establishments with an acceptable
compliance status, and gain compliance insight into establishments that
FDA has been unable to inspect. This experience has identified
significant benefits of using RRAs to FDA, regulated industry, and the
public. For these and other reasons, FDA is issuing this draft guidance
to describe its intention to, when appropriate, continue to use RRAs
outside of the COVID-19 public health emergency and for all FDA-
regulated product types.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on ``Conducting
Remote Regulatory Assessments.'' It does not establish any rights for
any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an
alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    FDA tentatively concludes that this draft guidance contains no
collection of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of
Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not
required.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 19, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-15812 Filed 7-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P