12–18–01 Tuesday Vol. 66 No. 243 Dec. 18, 2001 Pages 65091–65422
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:44 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\18DEWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DEWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001
The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 523–5243 Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ What’s NEW! fedreg. Federal Register Table of Contents via e-mail The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication Subscribe to FEDREGTOC, to receive the Federal Register Table of established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Contents in your e-mail every day. the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. If you get the HTML version, you can click directly to any document The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases in the issue. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. To subscribe, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select: The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the Online mailing list archives authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register FEDREGTOC-L as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each Join or leave the list day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text Then follow the instructions. and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log in as guest with no password. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $699, or $764 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $264. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $10.00 for each issue, or $10.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 66 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:44 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\18DEWS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DEWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 243
Tuesday, December 18, 2001
Agriculture Department North American Industry Classification System, 65369– See Forest Service 65370 See National Agricultural Library Prompt payment and overpayment recovery, 65352– See Rural Business-Cooperative Service 65367 See Rural Housing Service Small entity compliance guide, 65371–65374 See Rural Utilities Service Subcontract; definition, 65368–65370 NOTICES Army Department Civilian health and medical program of uniformed services NOTICES (CHAMPUS): Privacy Act: DRG-based payment system (2002 FY)— Systems of records, 65180–65183 TRICARE revised weights, thresholds, and per diem Arts and Humanities, National Foundation rates, 65179–65180 See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Education Department Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65183 Submission for OMB review; comment request; correction, 65213 Employment and Training Administration Coast Guard NOTICES RULES Adjustment assistance: Drawbridge operations: A-1 Manufacturing, Inc., 65222 Florida, 65104–65105 Aquaterra Biochemical Corp. of America, 65222 Ports and waterways safety: Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, Wiscasset, ME; ARA Cutting, LC, 65222 security zone, 65105–65107 Centis, Inc., 65222–65223 NOTICES Color Tex International, 65223 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Engineered Sintered Components, 65223 Merchant mariners; demonstrations of proficiency for Jonathan Engineered Solutions, 65223 persons in charge of medical care; assessment Littonian Shoe et al., 65224 guidelines, 65237–65243 Mike Dent Enterprises et al., 65224–65225 Thomaston Mills, Inc., 65225 Commerce Department Adjustment assistance and NAFTA transitional adjustment See Export Administration Bureau assistance: See International Trade Administration Cognis Corp. et al., 65220–65221 Summit Timber Co., 65221–65222 Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements NAFTA transitional adjustment assistance: NOTICES Cemex Kosmos Cement Co., 65225–65226 Cotton, wool, and man-made textiles: Bangladesh, 65177 Centis, Inc., 65226 Indonesia, 65178 Fedders Corp., 65226 Romania, 65177–65178 Gynecare, 65226 Textile and apparel categories: Imperial Home Decor Group, 65226–65227 Correlation with U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule, Indiana Knitwear-Willacy Apparel et al., 65227–65229 65178–65179 Jonathan Engineered Solutions, 65229 JPS Apparel Fabrics Corp., 65229 Defense Department Laser Tool, 65230 See Army Department Thomaston Mills, Inc., 65230 RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Component and end product; definitions, 65348–65351 Energy Department Contractor personnel; information technology services See Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office procurement, 65370–65372 See Energy Information Administration Discussion requirements in competitive negotiated See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission acquisitions, 65367–65369 NOTICES Energy-efficiency of supplies and services, 65350–65353 Meetings: Iceland; newly designated country under Trade Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Agreements Act, 65369–65371 Board— Introduction, 65347–65349 Chairs, 65185 Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act; subcontract preference under Rocky Flats, CO, 65184 service contracts, 65366–65368 Savannah River Site, SC, 65184–65185
VerDate 11
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office PROPOSED RULES RULES Television stations; table of assignments: Consumer products; energy conservation program: Utah and Nevada, 65164–65165 Test procedures— NOTICES Dishwashers, 65091–65097 Common carrier services: Pine Belt Cellular and Pine Belt PCS; telecommunication Energy Information Administration carrier designation for Alabama; petition; comment NOTICES request, 65210–65211 Agency information collection activities: Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65185– Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 65186 PROPOSED RULES Federal Deposit Insurance Act: Environmental Protection Agency Post-insolvency interest payment in receiverships with RULES surplus funds, 65144–65146 Water pollution control: NOTICES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System— Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65211 Cooling water intake structures for new facilities, 65255–65345 Federal Emergency Management Agency PROPOSED RULES RULES Air pollution control; new motor vehicles and engines: Flood elevation determinations: Nonroad large spark ignition engines and recreational Various States, 65107–65122 engines (marine and land-based); emissions control, NOTICES 65164 Disaster and emergency areas: Air programs: Alabama, 65211–65212 Fuels and fuel additives— Guam, 65212 Reformulated gasoline terminal receipt date; correction, Mississippi, 65212 65164 NOTICES Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Environmental Justice Small Grants Program; correction, Agency information collection activities: 65208 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65186– Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: 65187 Dioxin-like compounds in United States; environmental Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: releases; sources database; 1987 and 1995 reference UAE Mecklenburg Cogeneration LP et al., 65196–65198 years, 65208–65209 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Superfund; response and remedial actions, proposed Cominco American Inc., 65198 settlements, etc.: Upper Peninsula Power Co., 65198 Gardner & Hubbardston Site, MA, 65209 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Water pollution; discharge of pollutants: PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest Corp., 65199–65201 Gulf of Mexico, OCS operations— Hydroelectric applications, 65201–65207 Western portion; oil and gas extraction category, Meetings: general permit, 65209–65210 Energy Infrastructure Conference, 65207 National Register of Historic Places: Executive Office of the President Programmatic agreement for managing properties; See National Drug Control Policy Office restricted service list— Great Northern Paper, Inc., 65207–65208 Export Administration Bureau Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: NOTICES Canyon Creek Compression Co., 65187 Agency information collection activities: Cargill-Alliant, LLC, 65187 Proposed collection; comment request, 65175–65176 Columbia Gas Transmission Corp., 65187 Columbia Gulf Transmission Co., 65187–65188 Federal Aviation Administration Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 65188 RULES Dominion Transmission, Inc., 65188–65189 Airworthiness directives: Flambeau Hydro, LLC, 65189–65190 Sikorsky, 65102–65103 Gulf South Pipeline Co., LP, 65190 NOTICES High Island Offshore System, L.L.C., 65190 Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 65243 Inland Power & Light Co., 65190–65191 Meetings: Marseilles Hydro Power LLC, 65191 RTCA, Inc., 65243–65244 Nautilus Pipeline Co., L.L.C., 65191 Passenger facility charges; applications, etc.: Northern Border Pipeline Co., 65191–65192 Oneida County, WI, et al., 65244–65247 Northwest Pipeline Corp., 65192 Palm Beach International Airport, FL, 65247–65248 Oildale Energy LLC, 65192 Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc., 65193 Federal Communications Commission Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 65194–65195 RULES Pacific Gas & Electric Co. et al., 65193–65194 Television broadcasting: Questar Pipeline Co., 65195 Digital television conversion; rules and policies, 65122– Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., 65195 65140 William Gas Pipelines Central, Inc., 65195
VerDate 11
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Office PROPOSED RULES RULES Mortgage and loan programs: Practice and procedure: Uniform Financial Reporting Standards; additional entity Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and Federal filing requirements National Mortgage Association— Correction, 65162–65163 Flood insurance, 65097–65102 PROPOSED RULES Interior Department Risk-based capital: See Fish and Wildlife Service Counterparty haircuts, multifamily loans, and refunding; See Land Management Bureau technical amendments and corrections, 65146–65162 See National Indian Gaming Commission Internal Revenue Service Federal Reserve System NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Banks and bank holding companies: Proposed collection; comment request, 65252–65253 Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 65213 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 65213 International Trade Administration NOTICES Fish and Wildlife Service Antidumping: NOTICES Individually quick frozen red raspberries from— Endangered and threatened species permit applications, Chile, 65177 65218–65219 International Trade Commission NOTICES Food and Drug Administration Import investigations: NOTICES Ethyl alcohol for fuel use, 65219–65220 Meetings: Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee, 65213–65214 Labor Department Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: See Employment and Training Administration Filth from insects, rodents, and other pests in food, See Labor-Management Standards Office 65214 Labor-Management Standards Office Forest Service PROPOSED RULES Federal contractors and subcontractors: NOTICES Employee rights concerning union dues or fees payment Meetings: Duplicate copies of comments requested due to mail Modoc Resource Advisory Committee, 65174 delivery problems, 65163–65164 General Services Administration Land Management Bureau RULES NOTICES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Environmental statements; notice of intent: Component and end product; definitions, 65348–65351 Lander County, NV; Pipeline/South Pipeline Pit Contractor personnel; information technology services expansion, 65219 procurement, 65370–65372 Discussion requirements in competitive negotiated National Aeronautics and Space Administration acquisitions, 65367–65369 RULES Energy-efficiency of supplies and services, 65350–65353 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Iceland; newly designated country under Trade Component and end product; definitions, 65348–65351 Agreements Act, 65369–65371 Contractor personnel; information technology services Introduction, 65347–65349 procurement, 65370–65372 Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act; subcontract preference under Discussion requirements in competitive negotiated service contracts, 65366–65368 acquisitions, 65367–65369 North American Industry Classification System, 65369– Energy-efficiency of supplies and services, 65350–65353 65370 Iceland, newly designated country under Trade Prompt payment and overpayment recovery, 65352– Agreements Act, 65369–65371 65367 Introduction, 65347–65349 Small entity compliance guide, 65371–65374 Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act; subcontract preference under Subcontract; definition, 65368–65370 service contracts, 65366–65368 North American Industry Classification System, 65369– 65370 Health and Human Services Department Prompt payment and overpayment recovery, 65352– See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 65367 See Food and Drug Administration Small entity compliance guide, 65371–65374 See National Institutes of Health Subcontract; definition, 65368–65370 See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration National Agricultural Library NOTICES Housing and Urban Development Department Agency information collection activities: See Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Office Proposed collection; comment request, 65174–65175
VerDate 11
National Drug Control Policy Office See Food and Drug Administration NOTICES See National Institutes of Health Meetings: See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Drug Control Research, Data, and Evaluation Committee, Administration 65210 Railroad Retirement Board National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Meetings: Proposed collection; comment request, 65233–65234 Leadership Initiatives Advisory Panel, 65230 Partnerships Advisory Panel, 65231 Rural Business-Cooperative Service National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES RULES Agency information collection activities: Motor vehicle safety standards: Proposed collection; comment request, 65175 Occupant crash protection—- Future air bags designed to create less risk of serious Rural Housing Service injuries for small women and young children, etc., 65375–65421 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency information collection activities: Motor vehicle safety standards: Proposed collection; comment request, 65175 Defect and noncompliance reports— Recalled tires disposition, 65165–65173 Rural Utilities Service NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 65248–65251 Proposed collection; comment request, 65175 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 65251– 65252 Small Business Administration National Indian Gaming Commission NOTICES NOTICES Disaster loan areas: Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: Arkansas et al., 65234 Fee rates, 65231 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: New Markets Venture Capital Program, 65234 National Institutes of Health Meetings: NOTICES National Small Business Development Center Advisory Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, Board, 65234–65235 65214–65215 Meetings; district and regional advisory councils: Meetings: Connecticut, 65235 National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 65215 State Department National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, NOTICES 65215 Meetings: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Cultural Property Advisory Committee, 65235–65236 Diseases, 65216 International Communications and Information Policy Scientific Review Center, 65216–65217 Advisory Committee, 65236 Munitions export licenses; suspension, revocation, etc.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Indonesia, 65235 PROPOSED RULES Rulemaking petitions: Union of Concerned Scientists Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Denied, 65141–65144 Administration NOTICES NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Agency information collection activities: Exelon Generation Co., LLC, 65231–65232 Proposed collection; comment request, 65217–65218 International Uranium (USA) Corp,; correction, 65232 Textile Agreements Implementation Committee Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight See Committee for the Implementation of Textile See Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Office Agreements Postal Service NOTICES Transportation Department Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: See Coast Guard Postal transformation concepts; discussion outline; See Federal Aviation Administration comment request, 65232–65233 See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Public Health Service Privacy Act: See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Systems of records, 65236–65237
VerDate 11
Treasury Department Part IV See Internal Revenue Service Transportation Department, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 65375–65421
Separate Parts In This Issue Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for Part II phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Environmental Protection Agency, 65255–65345 and notice of recently enacted public laws. To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Part III LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Defense Department; General Services Administration; listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list National Aeronautics and Space Administration, archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change 65347–65374 settings); then follow the instructions.
VerDate 11
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
10 CFR Proposed Rules: 430...... 65091 573...... 65165 Proposed Rules: 54...... 65141 12 CFR 1773...... 65097 Proposed Rules: 360...... 65144 1750...... 65146 14 CFR 39...... 65102 24 CFR Proposed Rules: 5...... 65162 202...... 65162 29 CFR Proposed Rules: 470...... 65163 33 CFR 117...... 65104 165...... 65105 40 CFR 9...... 65256 122...... 65256 123...... 65256 124...... 65256 125...... 65256 Proposed Rules: 80...... 65164 89...... 65164 90...... 65164 91...... 65164 1048...... 65164 1051...... 65164 1065...... 65164 1068...... 65164 44 CFR 65 (2 documents) ...... 65107, 65110 67 (2 documents) ...... 65115, 65120 47 CFR 73...... 65122 Proposed Rules: 73...... 65164 48 CFR Ch. 1 (2 documents) ...... 65346, 65372 2 (3 documents) ...... 65349, 65351, 65353 5...... 65370 8...... 65367 11...... 65351 12...... 65370 15 (3 documents) ...... 65351, 65368, 65369 19...... 65370 22...... 65370 23 (2 documents) ...... 65351, 65370 25 (2 documents) ...... 65349, 65370 32...... 65353 39...... 65371 42...... 65351 44...... 65367 52 (5 documents) ...... 65349, 65353, 65367, 65370 53...... 65370 49 CFR 571...... 65376
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:45 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\18DELS.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DELS 65091
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 243
Tuesday, December 18, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Renewable Energy, EE–41, 1000 Conservation Program for Consumer contains regulatory documents having general Independence Avenue, SW, Products Other Than Automobiles applicability and legal effect, most of which Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 586– (Program). The products currently are keyed to and codified in the Code of 8714, email: [email protected]; subject to this Program (‘‘covered Federal Regulations, which is published under or Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. products’’) include residential 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Department of Energy, Office of General dishwashers, the subject of today’s final The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Counsel, GC–72, 1000 Independence rule. the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, Under the Act, the Program consists new books are listed in the first FEDERAL (202) 586–9507, email: of three parts: testing, labeling, and the REGISTER issue of each week. [email protected]. Federal energy conservation standards. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final The Department, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY rule incorporates, by reference, the ‘‘American National Standard, Technology (NIST), must amend or establish test procedures as appropriate Office of Energy Efficiency and Household Electric Dishwashers, ANSI/ for each of the covered products. Renewable Energy AHAM DW–1–1992’’ published by the Association of Home Appliance Section 323 of EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6293. The purpose of the test procedures is to 10 CFR Part 430 Manufacturers (AHAM). You may obtain copies of the referenced standard measure energy efficiency, energy use, [Docket No. EE–RM/TP–99–500] AHAM DW–1 from the Association of or estimated annual operating cost of a RIN 1904–AB04 Home Appliance Manufacturers, 1111 covered product during a representative 19th Street, NW., Suite 402, average use cycle or period of use. The Energy Conservation Program for Washington, DC 20036, (202) 872–5955. test procedure must not be unduly Consumer Products: Test Procedure Information regarding this rulemaking is burdensome to conduct. Section for Dishwashers also available on the Office of Codes and 323(b)(3) of EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3). If a test procedure is amended, DOE AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Standards web site at the following address: http://www.eren.doe.gov/ is required to determine to what extent, Renewable Energy, Department of if any, the new test procedure would Energy. buildings/codeslstandards/index.htm. I. Introduction alter the measured energy efficiency or ACTION: Final rule. A. Authority measured energy use of any covered B. Background product as determined under the SUMMARY: The Department of Energy C. Summary of the Test Procedure existing test procedure. If DOE (We, DOE, or the Department) today Revisions amends its test procedure for determines that an amended test II. Discussion procedure would alter the measured dishwashers. This amendment revises A. General Discussion the number of cycles per year used for B. Changes in Consumer Practices— efficiency or measured energy use of a calculating the estimated annual Representative Average Dishwasher Use covered product, DOE is required to operating cost, changes the definitions C. Improving Testing Repeatability amend the applicable energy of compact and standard models, and D. New Definitions for Compact and conservation standard accordingly. In Standard Models modifies some of the testing determining the amended energy III. Procedural Requirements conservation standard, DOE is required specifications to improve testing A. Review Under the National repeatability. These amendments to the to measure the energy efficiency or Environmental Policy Act of 1969 energy use of a representative sample of test procedure do not alter the minimum B. Review Under Executive Order 12866, energy conservation standards currently ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ covered products that minimally in effect for dishwashers. C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility comply with the existing standard. The Act average efficiency of these EFFECTIVE DATES: This rule is effective D. ‘‘Takings’’ Assessment Review representative samples, tested using the June 17, 2002. The incorporation by E. Review Under Executive Order 13132, amended test procedure, constitutes the reference of certain publications listed ‘‘Federalism’’ amended standard. Section 323(e)(1) of in this rule is approved by the Director F. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1). DOE has of the Federal Register as of June 17, Act determined that today’s amended test 2002. G. Review Under Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ procedure does not alter the measured ADDRESSES: You can read copies of all H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates efficiency or measured energy use of materials related to this rulemaking in Reform Act of 1995 dishwashers. the Freedom of Information Reading I. Review Under the Treasury and General Beginning 180 days after a test Room (Room 1E–190) at the U.S. Government Appropriations Act, 1999 procedure for a product is prescribed, Department of Energy, Forrestal J. Review Under Executive Order 13211 no manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, K. Congressional Notification private labeler may make SW., Washington, DC 20585, between I. Introduction representations with respect to the the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday energy use, efficiency, or cost of energy through Friday, except Federal holidays. A. Authority consumed by such products, except as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Part B of Title III of the Energy Policy reflected in tests conducted according to Barbara Twigg, U.S. Department of and Conservation Act, as amended the DOE procedure. Section 323(c)(2) of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and (EPCA or Act), establishes the Energy EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2).
VerDate 11
B. Background premature to publish a new test method • Reduce the representative average On September 28, 1999, the for those models at this time. AHAM number of use cycles per year to 264; cited the need for additional study by and Department published a Notice of • Proposed Rulemaking (proposed rule) industry before their members could Base the definitions of compact and (64 FR 52248) that proposed a new test propose a new test procedure which standard dishwashers on place-setting capacity. procedure for residential dishwashers. would accurately test the response and performance of machines using a variety 2. Improve testing repeatability: The key technological development that • Tighten the tolerance for ambient triggered the need for revision was the of soil-sensing technologies. They suggested that we divide the rulemaking temperature; introduction of adaptive control or soil- • Add more detail to test chamber sensing models. Industry and into two parts with the following course of action: first, we should proceed to installation requirements.; and government tests indicated that the • Add an instruction for existing test method using only clean finalize the proposed modifications to improve testing reliability, revise the manufacturers to run a conditioning dishes did not produce results that definitions for compact and standard cycle prior to the test. would accurately reflect the energy models, and update the number of use consumed by these machines in a real II. Discussion cycles per year to reflect current use environment. The Association of consumer use patterns. However, A. General Discussion Home Appliance Manufacturers AHAM recommended that we should While this final rule retains many of (AHAM) proposed a new approach for wait to publish a new, comprehensive the improvements to the test procedure testing the soil-sensing models using a method for testing soil-sensing models for measuring the energy use of formula to weight and average the until industry completed additional dishwashers presented in the September energy consumption of the minimum testing and proposed a new test 28, 1999, proposed rule, it also includes and maximum sensor normal cycles. We procedure. (AHAM No. 12 at 8). important changes. Most significantly, adapted that method and presented it Following these comments, DOE we are withdrawing the new method for comment in the September 28, 1999, further investigated the variety of soil- described in the proposed rule for proposed rule, along with several other sensing technologies in the market. We testing adaptive control dishwashers. issues such as the definitions for determined that additional data and We are retaining the original method compact and standard models, a research were required before an currently in effect for testing revision in the average number of times adequate test procedure for all soil- conventional and adaptive control dishwashers are used each year, and sensing models could be devised. As a dishwashers until we adopt, with the some new specifications for improving result, we agreed that it was premature assistance of the dishwasher industry testing repeatability. We held a public to finalize a rulemaking for those and other stakeholders, a new test workshop on November 2, 1999, to models at this time. We also agreed that method that will accurately test discuss the proposed changes, with we should not wait to finalize the other machines using a variety of sensor particular focus on the new method for proposed changes—the testing technologies. Manufacturers of soil- testing soil-sensing or adaptive control specifications, the definitions for sensing machines will continue to models. compact and standard models, and the record the energy consumption of those However, because of the questions reduction in the average number of use models by measuring the energy used raised at the workshop and the need cycles per year. These changes are when the dishwasher runs the specified expressed by industry to gather needed to improve the reliability of the load of clean dishes through the normal additional data and explore alternatives current test procedure, and to update cycle. to the proposed method for testing soil- the inputs for calculating the estimated Although the Department recognizes sensing models, we reopened the operating cost of all models. Therefore, the importance of determining a test comment period and extended the we are deferring the proposal of a new method which will accurately reflect the deadline for comments to February 14, method for testing soil-sensing energy performance of soil-sensing 2000. Again, comments raised problems machines until NIST, industry, and models under real life conditions, it with the proposed method. Stakeholders other stakeholders complete the studies became clear from all comments questioned the data supporting the necessary for enacting a definitive test submitted during the Notice of Proposed selection of the percentages used to procedure. This final rule substantially Rulemaking process that additional reflect the relative amount of soil retains the original test procedure, but research was necessary. Both industry encountered by soil-sensing adds new testing specifications, and environmental advocates shared dishwashers in typical loads. (Natural definitions, and a new number for concerns that there was insufficient Resources Defense Council (NRDC), No. average use cycles per year. We will understanding of how the machines 4 at 2, and Schleede, No. 8 at 3). Others continue to work with industry after performed under ‘‘typical’’ soil cited insufficient knowledge as to how this final rulemaking is enacted to conditions, and what those ‘‘typical’’ different machines would actually react develop a test procedure that accurately soil conditions actually were. The to varying soil loads, that is, what length reflects the cycle performance of the Natural Resources Defense Council cycle would be triggered under different variety of technologies used by soil- (NRDC), for example, urged the wash conditions. (Oregon Office of sensing machines. We anticipate that Department not to ‘‘make changes in the Energy (OOE), No. 9 at 1). One the final rule addressing soil-sensing test procedure unless they are supported manufacturer commented that the dishwashers will be completed in 2003. by data.’’ (NRDC No. 4 at 1). AHAM original AHAM method did not do an stressed that ‘‘there have been adequate job of reflecting the C. Summary of the Test Procedure significant changes in technology with performance of their machines’ Revisions regard to soil-sensing dishwashers and pressure-based, soil-sensing technology. The following are the major revisions there is still additional information (Whirlpool, No. 6 at 6). to the dishwasher test procedure needed on the usage of these units.’’ AHAM concluded that because of included in this final rule: (AHAM No. 12 at 8). significant changes and variations in 1. Update the test procedure to reflect The Department at first considered soil-sensing technology, it was changes in consumer practices: adopting an interim strategy for
VerDate 11
improving, at least partially, the based on Proctor and Gamble (P&G) 1999 Residential Energy Consumption accuracy of the energy factors derived surveys of consumer use conducted Survey as a source for consumer use from tests of soil-sensing models using prior to 1982. For this rulemaking, in data. (Schleede, No. 10 at 1). He stated only clean dishes. One proposal was looking for more recent data, the that ‘‘Data in the recently released EIA imposing a maximum cap on the energy Department learned from industry that report indicates that your (DOE’s) factor that could be claimed from using the Soap and Detergent Association estimate of 264 ‘‘cycles’’ is excessive the conventional test method. However, (SDA) was now the source to be and that the correct number is the lack of reliable, statistical contacted for survey data obtained by approximately 220 cycles (or less).’’ information in this area was one issue detergent manufacturers. By averaging (Schleede, No. 10 at 2). of significant concern during the the SDA data for available years The Department notes that survey workshop and comment periods: how to between 1985 and 1995, as discussed in data on the annual usage of dishwashers ascertain, with accuracy, the typical soil the proposed rule, we calculated 264 as are likely to vary from year to year. load, and then understand how a variety the average number of dishwasher use Rather than base its number on any of soil-sensing models will function in cycles per year. particular one year, the Department response to that load. Therefore, rather There were some issues raised at the prefers to take an average over several than focusing time, resources, and public workshop regarding the SDA years in order to smooth out year to year research on an interim proposal, we data. Energy Market & Policy Analysis variations. Regarding the use of the EIA decided to concentrate on the (Schleede) asked about the statistical data, NIST reviewed the EIA report development of a permanent test validity of the survey. (Schleede, which had surveyed 8,000 respondents method. We have underway, for Transcript at 19). The Oregon Office of nationwide and collected data on how example, a research project to evaluate Energy asked as to whether the survey often households use automatic available information on consumer considered such issues as family size. dishwashers in an average week. The behavior regarding the soil levels of (OOE, Transcript at 23). Northwest data, however, do not present a firm, typical dishwasher loads. This study Power Planning Council (NPPC) asked clear figure for the number of will assess the validity and adequacy of about household income and sample dishwasher cycles per year because of existing consumer behavior data, and size of the data. (NPPC, Transcript at the way the information was collected. suggest a means of relating the different 29). At the workshop, NIST provided In the report, the data are provided in consumer usage patterns with amounts additional information regarding the bands categorizing dishwasher use per and characteristics of food soils. This detergent manufacturers’ survey week along with the percentage of information will point the direction method, stating, ‘‘The data below comes responses for each band (less than 4 toward translating that average soil load from our study contacting nationally times per week, 4 to 6 times per week, into a repeatable test load for testing representative panelists from the and at least once per day). In order to dishwashers with adaptive controls and standpoint of geography, family size, use the EIA data, DOE somehow would soil sensors. It appears that using a age of homemaker, gender, income, and have to annualize the data or abandon repeatable soil load may be the only employment status. The data are the existing methodology. Neither the solution for accurately testing the obtained through an independent, EIA data nor the option of abandoning energy and water consumption of a outside research organization. This the existing methodology were within variety of adaptive control dishwashers. survey is run annually and has a base the scope of the proposed rule. Rather Although there are several existing size of 1,500 to 1,800 respondents.’’ than reopening the comment period or soil tests for dishwashers, both national AHAM commented that the SDA data reproposing the rule for public (such as the AHAM DW–1) and should be considered as an unbiased comment, DOE has decided to continue international, none of these currently source of information because ‘‘the studying the EIA data with a view satisfy our requirements for designing a manufacturers of dishwasher detergent toward possibly including it in the normal test that is representative of the have, if you will, a vested interest in forthcoming notice of proposed average soil load introduced by making sure that the data is absolutely rulemaking that would cover a test consumers. Since these methods test for as accurate as they can do because they procedure for adaptive control models. both cleaning performance and energy use it for inventory tracking, and to In DOE’s view, there is ample support consumption, they feature a very them it is extremely important to know in the record for the proposed figure of challenging soil load designed to be an exactly how much dishwasher detergent 264 cycles per year, and the extreme test of the dishwasher. is going to be used.’’ (AHAM, Transcript improvement in accuracy that might However, it may be possible to use a at 28). The Department believes the SDA come from use of the EIA data is not reduced number of soiled dishes from data is the best there is regarding worth the delay in bringing this one or a combination of these methods dishwasher usage in that it is based on rulemaking to a conclusion. to represent normal soiling, recognizing the detergent industry’s needs. C. Improving Testing Repeatability the importance of test repeatability and AHAM agreed with the Department’s the need to minimize test burden. We decision to use 264 cycles per year as In the proposed rule, the Department are exploring this possibility in the average figure for dishwasher use. discussed several changes to clarify the conjunction with consumer use data (AHAM, Transcript at 21). Stephens existing test procedure and improve its and expect to present for comment a thought the number could be higher repeatability when multiple tests are new test method for soil-sensing because of an upswing in the SDA data conducted. Although the manufacturers dishwashers in a proposed rule to be for 1995–1996 and believed the data agreed that such changes as tightening issued in 2002. might extrapolate to a Pacific Northwest the tolerances for ambient temperature region 1998–1999 survey which testing would improve reproducibility, B. Changes in Consumer Practices— tabulated 281 cycles per year. Stephens they expressed concern over one item: Representative Average Dishwasher Use recommended that we wait for 1997– the new definition for ‘‘truncated In 1983, DOE amended the 1998 detergent manufacturer data. normal cycle.’’ AHAM stated that dishwasher test procedure to reduce the (OOE, No. 9 at 2). Energy Market & changing the word ‘‘interrupted’’ to representative average use from 416 Policy Analysis thought the 264 number ‘‘preset’’ would unnecessarily increase cycles per year to 322 cycles per year was too high citing EIA’s November test burden by requiring additional test
VerDate 11
runs. Many manufacturers were 4321 et seq. The rule is covered by E. Review Under Executive Order 13132, measuring the energy consumption at Categorical Exclusion A5, for ‘‘Federalism’’ the end of the wash cycle, before the rulemakings that interpret or amend an Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ power dry, and recording that value as existing rule without changing the 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), requires the machine energy consumption for the environmental effect, as set forth in the that regulations, rules, legislation, and truncated normal cycle. The cycle was Department’s NEPA regulations in any other policy actions be reviewed for not terminated. The machine then was appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part any substantial direct effects on States, allowed to complete the power dry, and 1021. This final rule will not affect the on the relationship between the Federal the energy consumption was measured quality or distribution of energy usage Government and the States, or in the and recorded as the value of the and, therefore, will not result in any distribution of power and machine energy consumption for the environmental impacts. Accordingly, responsibilities among various levels of normal cycle. The current test neither an environmental impact Government. If there are substantial procedure (sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.2) statement nor an environmental direct effects, then this Executive Order calls for the user to average the water assessment is required. requires preparation of a Federalism consumption for the normal and assessment to be used in all decisions truncated normal cycles. However, the B. Review Under Executive Order 12866, involved in promulgating and proposal in the proposed rule (section ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ implementing a policy action. 1.10) called for a separate test cycle to The rule published today would not Today’s final rule is not a ‘‘significant be run for the truncated normal cycle in regulate or otherwise affect the States. regulatory action’’ under Executive order to measure the amount of energy Accordingly, DOE has determined that Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and consumed during the air dry portion of preparation of a Federalism assessment the cycle. In the public hearing Review.’’ 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). is unnecessary. discussions the manufacturers claimed Accordingly, today’s action is not that the energy consumed during the air subject to review under the Executive F. Review Under the Paperwork dry sequence was negligible, regardless Order by the Office of Information and Reduction Act of whether the action was to open a vent Regulatory Affairs. No new information or record keeping mechanically and let drying occur by C. Review Under the Regulatory requirements are imposed by this natural convection, or whether rulemaking. Accordingly, no OMB Flexibility Act mechanical drying was used to assist clearance is required under the the air dry. After tests by NIST The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. confirmed the claim that the energy U.S.C. 601–612, requires that an agency 3501 et seq. consumption during the air dry sequence was indeed negligible, DOE prepare an initial regulatory flexibility G. Review Under Executive Order concluded that a separate cycle need not analysis for any rule, for which a 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ general notice of proposed rulemaking be run. Under this final rule, With respect to the review of existing is required, that would have a manufacturers may continue to extract regulations and the promulgation of significant economic effect on small the normal and truncated normal energy new regulations, section 3(a) of consumption from a single test run. entities unless the agency certifies that Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Thus, the original definition will be the proposed rule, if promulgated, will Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), retained and reads: ‘‘Truncated Normal not have a significant economic impact imposes on Executive agencies the Cycle’’ means the normal cycle on a substantial number of small general duty to adhere to the following interrupted to eliminate the power-dry entities. 5 U.S.C. 605. requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting feature after the termination of the last Today’s rule prescribes test errors and ambiguity; (2) write rinse operation. procedures that will be used to test regulations to minimize litigation; and D. New Definitions for Compact and compliance with energy conservation (3) provide a clear legal standard for Standard Models standards. The rule affects dishwasher affected conduct rather than a general test procedures and would not have a standard and promote simplification As discussed in the proposed rule, we and burden reduction. With regard to are changing the definitions for significant economic impact, but rather would provide common testing the review required by sections 3(a) and determining compact and standard 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, it models. The new definitions of methods. Therefore DOE certifies that today’s rule would not have a specifically requires that Executive ‘‘compact dishwasher’’ and ‘‘standard agencies make every reasonable effort to dishwasher’’ use place-setting capacity ‘‘significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,’’ ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly instead of the measurement of the width specifies the preemptive effect, if any; of the unit. and the preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis is not warranted. (2) clearly specifies any effect on III. Procedural Requirements existing Federal law or regulation; (3) D. ‘‘Takings’’ Assessment Review provides a clear legal standard for A. Review Under the National affected conduct while promoting Environmental Policy Act of 1969 DOE has determined pursuant to simplification and burden reduction; (4) In this rule, the Department finalizes Executive Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) amendments to test procedures that may Actions and Interference with adequately defines key terms; and (6) be used to implement future energy Constitutionally Protected Property addresses other important issues conservation standards for dishwashers. Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), affecting clarity and general The Department has determined that that this regulation would not result in draftsmanship under any guidelines this rule falls into a class of actions that any takings which might require issued by the Attorney General. Section are categorically excluded from review compensation under the Fifth 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires under the National Environmental Amendment to the United States Executive agencies to review regulations Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. Constitution. in light of applicable standards in
VerDate 11
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine prepare a Family Policymaking PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION whether they are met or it is Assessment. PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER unreasonable to meet one or more of PRODUCTS them. DOE reviewed today’s final rule J. Review Under Executive Order 13211 under the standards of section 3 of the 1. The authority citation for part 430 Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions continues to read as follows: Executive Order and determined that, to Concerning Regulations That the extent permitted by law, the final Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. regulations meet the relevant standards. 2461 note. Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May H. Review Under the Unfunded 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to 2. Section 430.22 is amended in Mandates Reform Act of 1995 prepare and submit to the Office of Subpart B by revising paragraph (b)(1) Section 202 of the Unfunded Information and Regulatory Affairs introductory text and adding paragraph Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (OIRA), Office of Management and (b)(7) to read as follows: Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’) requires § 430.22 Reference Sources. that the Department prepare a budgetary any proposed significant energy action. impact statement before promulgating a A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined * * * * * rule that includes a Federal mandate as any action by an agency that (b) * * * (1) American National that may result in expenditure by state, promulgates or is expected to lead to the Standards Institute (ANSI). The ANSI local, and tribal governments, in the promulgation of a final rule, and that: standards listed in this paragraph may be obtained from the American National aggregate, or by the private sector, of (1) Is a significant regulatory action Standards Institute, 25 W. 43rd Street, $100 million or more in any one year. under Executive Order 12866, or any 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036, (212) The budgetary impact statement must successor order; and (2) is likely to have 642–4900. include: (i) Identification of the Federal a significant adverse effect on the law under which the rule is supply, distribution, or use of energy; or * * * * * promulgated; (ii) a qualitative and (3) is designated by the Administrator of (7) Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, 1111 19th Street, NW., quantitative assessment of anticipated OIRA as a significant energy action. For Suite 402, Washington, DC 20036, (202) costs and benefits of the Federal any proposed significant energy action, 872–5955, ‘‘American National mandate and an analysis of the extent to the agency must give a detailed which such costs to state, local, and Standard, Household Electric statement of any adverse effects on tribal governments may be paid with Dishwashers, ANSI/AHAM DW–1– energy supply, distribution, or use Federal financial assistance; (iii) if 1992.’’ should the proposal be implemented, feasible, estimates of the future * * * * * and of reasonable alternatives to the compliance costs and of any 3. Section 430.23 of subpart B is disproportionate budgetary effects the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use. amended by revising the section mandate has on particular regions, heading, and paragraph (c) to read as communities, non-Federal units of Today’s final rule will not have a follows: government, or sectors of the economy; significant adverse effect on the supply, (iv) if feasible, estimates of the effect on distribution, or the use of energy, and, § 430.23 Test procedures for the the national economy; and (v) a therefore, is not a significant energy measurement of energy and water description of the Department’s prior action. Accordingly, DOE has not consumption. consultation with elected prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. * * * * * representatives of state, local, and tribal (c) Dishwashers. (1) The estimated governments and a summary and K. Congressional Notification annual operating cost (EAOC) for evaluation of the comments and dishwashers must be rounded to the As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will concerns presented. nearest dollar per year and is defined as submit to Congress a report regarding The Department has determined that follows: the action today does not include a the issuance of today’s final rule prior (i) When cold water (50°F) is used, Federal mandate that may result in to the effective date set forth at the (A) For dishwashers having a estimated costs of $100 million or more outset of this notice. The report will truncated normal cycle as defined in to State, local or to tribal governments state that it has been determined that section 1.9 of appendix C to this in the aggregate or to the private sector. the rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined subpart, Therefore, the requirements of Sections by 5 U.S.C. 801(2). EAOC=N × De × (0.5 × (Mn+Mt)) 203 and 204 of the Unfunded Mandates List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 Act do not apply to this action. (B) for dishwashers not having a Administrative practice and truncated normal cycle, I. Review Under the Treasury and procedure, Energy conservation, × × General Government Appropriations EAOC = N De Mn Household appliances, Incorporation by Act, 1999 where, reference. Section 654 of the Treasury and N = the representative average General Government Appropriations Issued in Washington, DC, on December dishwasher use of 264 cycles per Act, 1999 (Pub. L. No. 105–277) requires 12, 2001. year, Federal agencies to issue a Family David K. Garman, De = the representative average unit Policymaking Assessment for any Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and cost of electrical energy in dollars proposed rule or policy that may affect Renewable Energy. per kilowatt-hour as provided by family well-being. Today’s final rule the Secretary, would not have any impact on the For the reasons set forth in the Mn = the machine electrical energy autonomy or integrity of the family as preamble, part 430 of Chapter II of Title consumption per-cycle for the an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 10, Code of Federal Regulations, is normal cycle as defined in section concluded that it is not necessary to amended, as set forth below. 1.5 of appendix C to this subpart, in
VerDate 11
kilowatt-hours and determined (2) The energy factor for dishwashers, 1.10 Water-heating dishwasher means a according to section 5.1 of appendix expressed in cycles per kilowatt-hour is dishwasher which is designed for heating ° C to this subpart, defined as: cold inlet water (nominal 50 F) or a dishwasher for which the manufacturer Mt = the machine electrical energy (i) For dishwashers not having a truncated normal cycle, as the recommends operation with a nominal inlet consumption per-cycle for the water temperature of 120°F, and may operate truncated normal cycle, in kilowatt- reciprocal of the total energy at either of these inlet water temperatures by hours and determined according to consumption per cycle (En) for the providing internal water heating to above section 5.1 of appendix C to this normal cycle in kilowatt-hours per 120°F in at least one wash phase of the subpart. cycle, determined according to section normal cycle. (ii) When electrically-heated water 5.4 of appendix C to this subpart, and 2. Testing Conditions (120°F or 140°F) is used, (ii) For dishwashers having a (A) For dishwashers having a truncated normal cycle, as the 2.1 Installation Requirements. Install the dishwasher according to the manufacturer’s truncated normal cycle as defined in reciprocal of one-half the sum of (A) The total energy consumption per instructions. A standard or compact under- section 1.9 of appendix C to this counter or under-sink dishwasher must be subpart, cycle for the normal cycle (En), plus tested in a rectangular enclosure constructed (B) The total energy consumption per EAOC = N × D × (0.5 × (E +E )) of nominal 0.374 inch (9.5 mm) plywood e n t cycle for the truncated normal cycle (E), (B) For dishwashers not having a painted black. The enclosure must consist of each in kilowatt-hours per cycle and truncated normal cycle, a top, a bottom, a back, and two sides. If the × × × determined according to section 5.4 of dishwasher includes a counter top as part of EAOC = N De En where, appendix C to this subpart. the appliance, omit the top of the enclosure. N and De are defined in paragraph (3) Other useful measures of energy Bring the enclosure into the closest contact (c)(1)(i) of this section, consumption for dishwashers are those with the appliance that the configuration of En = the total electrical energy which the Secretary determines are the dishwasher will allow. consumption per-cycle for the likely to assist consumers in making 2.2 Electrical energy supply. normal cycle as defined in section 2.2.1 Dishwashers that operate with an purchasing decisions and which are electrical supply of 115 volts. Maintain the 1.5 of appendix C to this subpart, in derived from the application of electrical supply to the dishwasher within kilowatt-hours and determined appendix C to this subpart. two percent of 115 volts and within one according to section 5.1 of appendix 4. Appendix C to Subpart B of Part percent of the nameplate frequency as C to this subpart, 430 is revised to read as follows: specified by the manufacturer. Et = the total electrical energy 2.2.2 Dishwashers that operate with an consumption per-cycle for the Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 430– electrical supply of 240 volts. Maintain the truncated normal cycle, in kilowatt- Uniform Test Method for Measuring the electrical supply to the dishwasher within hours and determined according to Energy Consumption of Dishwashers two percent of 240 volts and within one percent of its nameplate frequency as section 5.1 of appendix C to this 1. Definitions specified by the manufacturer. subpart. 1.1 AHAM means the Association of 2.3 Water temperature. Measure the (iii) When gas-heated or oil-heated Home Appliance Manufacturers. temperature of the water supplied to the water is used, 1.2 Compact dishwasher means a dishwasher using a temperature measuring (A) For dishwashers having a dishwasher that has a capacity less than eight device as specified in section 3.1 of this truncated normal cycle as defined in place settings plus six serving pieces as Appendix. specified in ANSI/AHAM Standard DW–1 2.3.1 Dishwashers to be tested at a section 1.9 of appendix C to this (see § 430.22). ° subpart, nominal 140 F inlet water temperature. 1.3 Cycle means a sequence of operations Maintain the water supply temperature at of a dishwasher which performs a complete EAOC = N × ((De × 0.5(Mn+Mt))+(Dw × 140 ± 5°F. dishwashing function, and may include 0.5(Wn+Wt))) 2.3.2 Dishwashers to be tested at a variations or combinations of washing, nominal 120°F inlet water temperature. (B) For dishwashers not having a rinsing, and drying. truncated normal cycle, Maintain the water supply temperature at 1.4 Cycle type means any complete 120 ± 2°F. sequence of operations capable of being EAOC = N × ((D × M )+(D × W )) 2.3.3 Dishwashers to be tested at a e n w n preset on the dishwasher prior to the nominal 50°F inlet water temperature. where, initiation of machine operation. Maintain the water supply temperature at 50 1.5 Normal cycle means the cycle type N, De, Mn and Mt are defined in ± 2 °F. paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, recommended by the manufacturer for completely washing a full load of normally 2.4 Water pressure. Using a water Dw = the representative average unit soiled dishes including the power-dry pressure gauge as specified in section 3.3 of cost in dollars per Btu for gas or oil, this Appendix, maintain the pressure of the feature. ± as appropriate, as provided by the 1.6 Power-dry feature means the water supply at 35 2.5 pounds per square Secretary, introduction of electrically generated heat inch gauge (psig). 2.5 Ambient and machine temperature. Wn = the total water energy into the washing chamber for the purpose of improving the drying performance of the Using a temperature measuring device as consumption per cycle for the specified in section 3.1 of this Appendix, normal cycle as defined in section dishwasher. 1.7 Preconditioning cycle means any maintain the room ambient air temperature at ± ° 1.5 of appendix C to this subpart, in cycle that includes a fill, circulation, and 75 5 F, and ensure that the dishwasher and Btus and determined according to drain to ensure that the water lines and sump the test load are at room ambient temperature section 5.3 of appendix C to this area of the pump are primed. at the start of each test cycle. subpart, 1.8 Standard dishwasher means a 2.6 Load. dishwasher that has a capacity equal to or 2.6.1 Dishwashers to be tested at a Wt = the total water energy ° consumption per cycle for the greater than eight place settings plus six nominal inlet temperature of 140 F. These units must be tested on the normal cycle truncated normal cycle as defined serving pieces as specified in ANSI/AHAM Standard DW–1 (see § 430.22). without a test load. in section 1.9 of appendix C to this 1.9 Truncated normal cycle means the 2.6.2 Dishwashers to be tested at a subpart, in Btus and determined normal cycle interrupted to eliminate the nominal inlet temperature of 50 °F or 120 °F. according to section 5.3 of appendix power-dry feature after the termination of the These units must be tested on the normal C to this subpart. last rinse operation. cycle with a test load of eight place settings
VerDate 11
plus six serving pieces, as specified in 5.2 Water energy consumption for V is measured in section 4.3 of this AHAM Standard DW–1. If the capacity of the dishwashers using electrically heated water. Appendix, dishwasher, as stated by the manufacturer, is Determine the water energy consumption T = nominal water heater temperature less than eight place settings, then the test according to sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 of this rise = 70 °F, load must be the stated capacity. Appendix. Use the notation Wn for a test of K = specific heat of water in kilowatt-hours 2.7 Testing requirements. Provisions in the normal cycle or Wt for a test of the per gallon per degree Fahren- this appendix pertaining to dishwashers that truncated normal cycle, and express in heit = 0.0024, operate with a nominal inlet temperature of kilowatt-hours per cycle. Note that e = nominal gas or oil water heater 50 °F or 120 °F apply only to water heating electrically heated water was used. recovery efficiency = 0.75. dishwashers. 5.2.1 Dishwashers that operate with a ° 5.4 Total energy consumption per cycle. 2.8 Preconditioning requirements. nominal 140 F inlet water temperature, only. For each test cycle the total per-cycle energy For each test cycle, calculate the water Precondition the dishwasher by establishing consumption, E, is defined as the sum of the energy consumption, W, expressed in the testing conditions set forth in sections 2.1 per-cycle machine electrical energy through 2.5 of this Appendix. Set the kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined as: consumption, M, and the per-cycle water dishwasher to the preconditioning cycle as × × W = V T K energy consumption, W, in kilowatt-hours defined in section 1.7 of this Appendix, where, per cycle. For the cycle type, M is calculated without using a test load, and initiate the according to section 5.1 of this Appendix and cycle. V = reported water consumption in gallons per cycle, as measured in section 4.3 of W is calculated according to section 5.2 of 3. Instrumentation this Appendix, this Appendix for electrically heated water, T = nominal water heater temperature or according to section 5.3 for gas or oil 3.1 Temperature measuring device. The ° device must have an error no greater than ± rise = 90 F, heated water. Use the notation En for a test 1 °F over the range being measured. K = specific heat of water in kilowatt-hours of the normal cycle or Et for a test of the 3.2 Water meter. The water meter must per gallon per degree Fahren- truncated normal cycle, and express in have a resolution of no larger than 0.1 gallons heit = 0.0024. kilowatt-hours per cycle. and a maximum error no greater than 1.5 5.2.2 Dishwashers that operate with a 5. Section 430.32 of Subpart C is ° percent for all water flow rates from one to nominal inlet water temperature of 120 F. amended by revising paragraph (f) to five gallons per minute and for all water For each test cycle, calculate the water read as follows: temperatures encountered in the test cycle. energy consumption, W, expressed in 3.3 Water pressure gauge. The water kilowatt-hours per cycle and defined as: § 430.32 Energy and water conservation pressure gauge must have a resolution of one W = V × T × K standards and effective dates. pound per square inch (psi) and must have where, * * * * * an error no greater than 5 percent of any V = reported water consumption in gallons measured value over the range of 35 ± 2.5 (f) Dishwashers. The energy factor of per cycle, as measured in section 4.3 of dishwashers manufactured on or after psig. this Appendix, 3.4 Watt-hour meter. The watt-hour meter T = nominal water heater temperature May 14, 1994, must not be less than: must have a resolution of no greater than 1 rise = 70 °F, watt-hour and a maximum error of no more K = specific heat of water in kilowatt-hours Energy factor Product class (cycles/kWh) than 1 percent of the measured value for any per gallon per degree Fahren- demand greater than 50 watts. heit = 0.0024. (1) Compact Dishwasher 4. Test Cycle and Measurements 5.3 Water energy consumption per cycle (capacity less than eight 4.1 Test cycle. Perform a test cycle by using gas-heated or oil-heated water. place settings plus six establishing the testing conditions set forth in Determine the water energy consumption for serving pieces as speci- section 2 of this Appendix, setting the dishwashers according to sections 5.3.1 and fied in ANSI/AHAM dishwasher to the cycle type to be tested, 5.3.2 of this Appendix. Use the notation Wn Standard DW–1 (see initiating the cycle, and allowing the cycle to for a test of the normal cycle or Wt for a test section 430.22)) ...... 0.62 proceed to completion. of the truncated normal cycle, and express in (2) Standard Dishwasher 4.2 Machine electrical energy kilowatt-hours per cycle. Note that gas- (capacity equal to or consumption. Measure the electrical energy heated or oil-heated water was used. greater than eight place 5.3.1 Dishwashers that operate with a consumed by the machine during the test ° settings plus six serving cycle, M, expressed in kilowatt-hours per nominal 140 F inlet water temperature, only. pieces as specified in cycle, using a water supply temperature as For each test cycle, calculate the water ANSI/AHAM Standard set forth in section 2.3 of this Appendix and energy consumption using gas-heated or oil- DW–1(see section using a watt-hour meter as specified in heated water, W, expressed in kilowatt-hours 430.22)) ...... 0.46 section 3.4 of this Appendix. per cycle and defined as: × × 4.3 Water consumption. Measure the W = V T K/e * * * * * water consumption, V, specified as the where, number of gallons delivered to the V = reported water consumption in gallons [FR Doc. 01–30980 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] dishwasher during the entire test cycle, using per cycle, as measured in section 4.3 of BILLING CODE 6450–01–P a water meter as specified in section 3.2 of this Appendix, this Appendix. T = nominal water heater temperature 4.4 Report values. You must report the rise = 90 °F, electrical energy consumption and water DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND K = specific heat of water in kilowatt-hours URBAN DEVELOPMENT consumption values for the machine, as per gallon per degree Fahren- measured. heit = 0.0024, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise e = nominal gas or oil water heater 5. Calculation of derived results from test Oversight measurements recovery efficiency = 0.75. 5.3.2 Dishwashers that operate with a 5.1 Machine energy consumption for nominal inlet water temperature of 120 °F. 12 CFR Part 1773 electric dishwashers. Use the value recorded For each test cycle, calculate the water in section 4.2 of this Appendix as the per- RIN 2550–AA21 energy consumption using gas heated or oil cycle machine electrical energy heated water, W, expressed in kilowatt-hours consumption. Use the notation Mn for a test Flood Insurance of the normal cycle or M for a test of the per cycle and defined as: t × × truncated normal cycle and express in W = V T C/c AGENCY: Office of Federal Housing kilowatt-hours per cycle. where, Enterprise Oversight, HUD.
VerDate 11
ACTION: Final Regulation. comprehensive National Flood September 12, 2001) for public Insurance Program (‘‘NFIP’’) that comment relating to its flood insurance SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Housing includes various provisions designed to oversight responsibilities. Comments on Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) is issuing ensure that structures built in flood the proposed regulation were received a final regulation to clarify and to codify plains are covered by, at least, specified only from the two Enterprises. Those OFHEO’s authority and ongoing statutory minimum amounts of flood comments were carefully considered in responsibility to oversee and enforce the insurance. NFIRA, among other things, developing this final regulation. A statutory requirements affecting the added specific requirements explicitly discussion of those comments and operations of the Federal National applicable to the Enterprises; 6 OFHEO’s response to them follows. Mortgage Association and the Federal designated OFHEO as the Federal II. Background Home Loan Mortgage Corporation under agency responsible for determining the National Flood Insurance Reform compliance of the Enterprises’ flood The Enterprises have a key role in the Act of 1994. insurance responsibilities; required implementation of the National Flood EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of OFHEO to report to Congress on the Insurance Program, particularly with this regulation is December 18, 2001. Enterprises’ compliance in the agency’s regard to lenders that are not subject to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 1996, 1998 and 2000 annual reports; 7 direct supervision by a Federal E. Guzman, Counsel, telephone (202) and authorized OFHEO to issue any regulatory agency. The Enterprises use 414–3832; David A. Felt, Associate regulations necessary to carry out the their seller/servicer guidelines and other General Counsel, telephone (202) 414– applicable provisions of NFIRA.8 NFIRA quality control review procedures to 3750 (not toll free numbers), Office of also explicitly authorized OFHEO to ensure that lenders with whom they General Counsel, Office of Federal impose civil money penalties upon an contract comply with the applicable Housing Enterprise Oversight, 1700 G Enterprise that fails to implement flood insurance laws. The Enterprises Street, NW., Fourth Floor, Washington, procedures reasonably designed to are required to establish procedures DC 20552. The telephone number for ensure that the loans it purchases designed to prevent their purchase of the Telecommunications Device for the comply with the mandatory flood loans that do not comply with these Deaf is (800) 877–8339. insurance purchase requirements.9 laws. NFIRA tasks OFHEO with SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: More specifically, NFIRA requires reviewing the adequacy of such I. Statutory Framework that the Enterprises each implement procedures as well as the Enterprises’ procedures reasonably designed to compliance with them. Title XIII of the Housing and ensure that any mortgage loan that is A primary purpose of the final Community Development Act of 1992, purchased and is secured by property regulation is to reiterate the relevant Public Law 102–550, entitled the located in a designated flood hazard statutory provisions specifically ‘‘Federal Housing Enterprises Financial area is covered for the term of the loan applicable to the Enterprises and to Safety and Soundness Act of 1992’’ (the by flood insurance in an amount at least OFHEO and to codify them in OFHEO’s 1 ‘‘Act’’), established the Office of equal to the lesser of (1) the outstanding regulations. The final regulation is Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight principal balance of the loan or (2) the intended to provide guidance as to the (‘‘OFHEO’’) as an independent office maximum limit of coverage made procedures to be applied if an within the Department of Housing and available for that type of property under enforcement action were to be required, Urban Development. OFHEO is the the NFIP. OFHEO is authorized under to add statutory civil money penalty financial safety and soundness regulator NFIRA to levy a civil money penalty for amounts for infractions of the flood of the nation’s two largest housing- each violation, not to exceed an insurance requirements to the schedule related Government-sponsored aggregate maximum amount per year,10 of penalties in OFHEO’s regulations and enterprises: the Federal National against an Enterprise that it finds to to adjust such penalty amounts as Mortgage Association (‘‘Fannie Mae’’) have engaged in a pattern or practice of contemplated by law for inflation. and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage purchasing loans in violation of the Corporation (‘‘Freddie Mac’’) procedures established pursuant to The Inflation Adjustment Act (collectively, the ‘‘Enterprises’’). In NFIRA.11 The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation addition to establishing OFHEO, the Act OFHEO published a notice of Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by made amendments to the Enterprises’ proposed rulemaking (66 FR 47563, the Debt Collection Improvement Act of enabling statutes (collectively, ‘‘the 1996 (the Inflation Adjustment Act),12 2 Charter Acts’’) to, among other things, 6 42 U.S.C. 4012a(b)(3). requires Federal agencies with the accommodate the restructured 7 12 U.S.C. 4521(a)(4). authority to issue civil money penalties, 8 regulatory regime under the Act. 42 U.S.C. 4001 note. to adopt regulations to adjust each civil The National Flood Insurance Act of 9 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3). 3 10 Pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation money penalty authorized by law that 1968 (‘‘NFIA’’) and the Flood Disaster the agency has jurisdiction to Protection Act of 1973 (‘‘FDPA’’),4 as Adjustment Act of 1990 (Inflation Adjustment Act), as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement administer. The purpose of these amended by the National Flood Act of 1996, adjustments have been made to the adjustments is to maintain the deterrent Insurance Reform Act of 1994 civil money penalty amounts. The Inflation effect of civil money penalties and (‘‘NFIRA’’),5 together establish a Adjustment Act’s rounding rules require that each increase be rounded to the nearest multiple as promote compliance with the law. The follows: $10 in the case of penalties less than or Inflation Adjustment Act requires 1 12 U.S.C. 4501 et seq. equal to $100; $100 in the case of penalties greater agencies to make an initial adjustment 2 Federal National Mortgage Association Charter than $100 but less than or equal to $1,000; $1,000 Act (12 U.S.C. 1716–1723i) and Federal Home Loan in the case of penalties greater than $1,000 but less of their civil money penalties upon the Mortgage Corporation Act (12 U.S.C. 1451–1459). than or equal to $10,000; $5,000 in the case of statute’s enactment, and to make 3 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq. and other scattered penalties greater than $10,000 but less than or equal additional adjustments on an ongoing sections of 42 U.S.C. to $100,000; $10,000 in the case of penalties greater basis, at least once every four years 4 42 U.S.C. 4002 et seq. and other scattered than $100,000 but less than or equal to $200,000; sections of 42 U.S.C. and $25,000 in the case of penalties greater than following the initial adjustment. 5 Pub. L. 103–325 (Sept. 23, 1994) (codified, as $200,000. amended, at 42 U.S.C. 4001–4129). 11 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3), (5). 12 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
VerDate 11
Under the Inflation Adjustment Act, previous maximum penalty amount to mobile home, and any personal property the inflation adjustment for each determine the new adjusted maximum securing such loan are covered for the applicable civil money penalty is penalty amount. However, the Inflation term of the loan by flood insurance in determined by increasing the maximum Adjustment Act further specifies that an amount at least equal to the lesser of civil money penalty amount by a cost- the first adjustment of any civil money the outstanding principal balance of the of-living adjustment. As is described in penalty pursuant to such Act may not loan or the maximum limit of coverage detail below, the Inflation Adjustment exceed ten percent of the penalty. made available with respect to the Act provides that this cost-of-living Accordingly, the original civil money particular type of property under the adjustment is to reflect the percentage penalty maximum of $350 under NFIRA National Flood Insurance Program. increase in the Consumer Price Index is increased to $385 for each violation Section 1773.2(b) sets forth that the since the civil money penalties were last and the civil money penalty maximum procedures in section 1773.2(a) need adjusted or established. of $100,000 is increased to $110,000 for apply only to loans made, increased, NFIRA sets forth the procedures the total assessed penalties against any extended, or renewed after September under which the Director of OFHEO Enterprise during any calendar year. 22, 1995. It further provides that could impose civil money penalties paragraph (a) does not apply to any loan against an Enterprise and the amounts Section-By-Section Analysis having an original outstanding principal of these civil money penalties. In this Section 1773.1 Authority and Scope balance of $5,000 or less and a rulemaking, the amounts of these civil repayment term of one year or less. money penalties are being adjusted in Section 1773.1 sets forth the authority Section 1773.3 Civil Money Penalties accordance with the requirements of the upon which this final regulation is Inflation Adjustment Act. The increases based, namely the National Flood Section 1773.3 sets forth procedures in maximum civil money penalty Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood under this final section under which the amounts contained in this final rule do Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as Director of OFHEO may impose civil not mandate the amount of any civil amended by the National Flood money penalties against an Enterprise. money penalty that OFHEO may seek Insurance Reform Act of 1994. The Section 1773.3(a) sets forth that the for a particular violation; OFHEO would National Flood Insurance Reform Act of Director of OFHEO may assess a civil determine each civil money penalty on 1994 requires OFHEO to examine the money penalty against an Enterprise a case-by-case basis in light of the Enterprises to ascertain their determined by the Director to have circumstances of the case. compliance with these statutes and to engaged in a pattern or practice of The Inflation Adjustment Act directs report to Congress on their compliance, purchasing loans in violation of the Federal agencies to calculate each civil and provides OFHEO with the authority procedures established pursuant to money penalty adjustment as the to issue any regulations necessary to § 1773.2. percentage by which the CPI–U for June carry out the applicable provisions of Section 1773.3(b) sets forth notice and of the calendar year preceding the NFIRA. OFHEO is authorized to impose hearing requirements prior to the adjustment exceeds the CPI–U for June civil money penalties on an Enterprise imposition of civil money penalties of the calendar year in which the for violation of procedures established under this section. A civil money amount of such civil money penalty was pursuant to the National Flood penalty may be issued only after notice last set or adjusted pursuant to law. Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, or and an opportunity for a hearing on the OFHEO has not previously adjusted rules or regulations adopted pursuant record has been provided under 12 CFR these CMP amounts, so the base period thereto.14 part 1780. Section 1773.3(c) sets forth the is 1995, the year the statutory Section 1773.2 Requirements requirements became applicable to the maximum amount of civil money Enterprises. Because OFHEO is making Section 1773.2(a) sets forth the penalties that may be imposed on an these adjustments in calendar year 2001, requirement that each Enterprise is to Enterprise under this section. A civil and the statutory requirements became implement procedures reasonably money penalty under this section may applicable to the Enterprises in 1995, designed to ensure that the properties not exceed the adjusted statutory the inflation adjustment amount for securing particular loans described in amount of $385 for each violation and each civil money penalty was calculated paragraph (a) are properly insured in the total amount of penalties assessed by comparing the CPI–U for June 1995 accordance with the National Flood under this section against an Enterprise (152.5) with the CPI–U for June 2000 Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood during any calendar year may not (172.4), resulting in an inflation Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as exceed the adjusted statutory cap of adjustment of 13.05 percent. For each amended by the National Flood $110,000 for such total penalties. civil money penalty, the product of this Insurance Reform Act of 1994. This Section 1773.3(d) sets forth inflation adjustment and the previous requirement applies to any loan procedures for the deposit of civil maximum penalty amount was then purchased by an Enterprise that is money penalties. Any civil money rounded in accordance with the specific secured by improved real estate or a penalties collected under this section requirements of the Inflation mobile home located in an area that has shall be paid into the National Flood Adjustment Act,13 then added to the been identified, at the time of the Mitigation Fund in accordance with 42 origination of the loan or at any time U.S.C. 4104d. 13 The statute’s rounding rules require that each during the term of the loan, by the Section 1773.3(e) provides that any increase be rounded to the nearest multiple as Director of the Federal Emergency civil money penalty under this section follows: $10 in the case of penalties less than or Management Agency as an area having shall be in addition to any civil remedy equal to $100; $100 in the case of penalties greater than $100 but less than or equal to $1,000; $1,000 special flood hazards and in which or criminal penalty otherwise available. in the case of penalties greater than $1,000 but less flood insurance is available under the Section 1773.3(f) provides that no than or equal to $10,000; $5,000 in the case of National Flood Insurance Program. As penalty may be imposed under this penalties greater than $10,000 but less than or equal explained in this section, the Enterprise section after the expiration of the four- to $100,000; $10,000 in the case of penalties greater than $100,000 but less than or equal to $200,000; is required to ensure that a building or year period beginning on the date of the and $25,000 in the case of penalties greater than occurrence of the violation for which $200,000. 14 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3). the penalty is authorized.
VerDate 11
III. Comments on the Proposed Flood asserts, therefore, that OFHEO’s enforcing the requirements of the Insurance Regulation authority to assess penalties does not National Flood Insurance Reform Act extend to other violations of the and empowers OFHEO with the Enterprise Compliance proposed flood insurance regulation or authority to assessing civil money Fannie Mae’s first comment the law. According to Freddie Mac, the penalties. Freddie Mac asserts that to concerned proposed new 12 CFR proposed flood insurance regulation the extent proposed new 12 CFR 1773.2(a), which sets forth the exceeds statutory limits to the extent 1773.1(a) can be read more broadly to requirement that each Enterprise is to that its language could be read to encompass more than what the statute implement procedures reasonably provide for regulatory action against contemplated it is invalid. That is, designed to ensure that the properties other statutory or regulatory violations, Freddie Mac asserts that the National securing particular loans described in or would permit regulatory sanctions Flood Insurance Reform Act establishes paragraph (a) are properly insured in other than civil money penalties. the only enforcement sanction accordance with the National Flood Fannie Mae expressed similar applicable to the Enterprises to be civil Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood concerns that the language in proposed money penalty assessments, and no Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as new 12 CFR 1773.3(a) is overbroad in other administrative action or sanction amended by the National Flood suggesting that OFHEO may assess civil is available to OFHEO. Insurance Reform Act of 1994. Both money penalties against an Enterprise Both commenters recommended that Enterprises assert that they have that engages in a pattern or practice of OFHEO amend proposed new 12 CFR implemented procedures consistent purchasing loans in violation of 1773.1(a) to more narrowly recite that with these statutes and have also procedures established pursuant to the OFHEO is charged solely with enforcing consistently complied with all statutory National Flood Insurance Act. Fannie the requirements of 42 U.S.C. requirements for flood insurance. Mae urges OFHEO to substitute the 4012a(b)(3) through the assessment of Fannie Mae noted that neither the reference to the National Flood civil money penalties. proposed regulation nor the preamble of Insurance Act for a reference to 42 Similarly, Fannie Mae asserts that to the proposal suggest that the proposal, U.S.C. 4012a(b)(3), inasmuch as the the extent proposed new 12 CFR should it be adopted, is intended to latter is assertedly the specific statutory 1773.1(a) contemplates that OFHEO require the Enterprises to readdress or provision to which OFHEO’s civil may enforce the requirements of the revise the procedures they already have money penalty authority in 42 U.S.C. National Flood Insurance with respect developed and implemented that 4012a(f)(3) relates. to the Enterprises that language is overly comply with the relevant statutes. OFHEO disagrees. The regulatory broad inasmuch as OFHEO has no Fannie Mae suggested that OFHEO scheme established under NFIA under statutory basis for instituting an confirm this interpretation in which OFHEO is charged to ensure enforcement action against an connection with final rulemaking so as compliance by the Enterprises cannot be Enterprise under the National Flood to avoid any confusion on this point. reasonably read to allow unlawful Insurance Reform Act beyond that It would not be germaine, however, to conduct to go without sanction or explicitly set forth in 42 U.S.C. 4012a. the purposes of a rulemaking to issue a remedy. OFHEO is broadly empowered Fannie Mae further asserts that pronouncement that an Enterprises has under its enabling law to ensure the safe OFHEO’s organic enforcement fully developed and implemented and sound operations of the Enterprises, authority, found at 12 U.S.C. 4615 et adequate procedures that comply with including authority to oversee seq., includes no explicit language their statutory responsibilities. The compliance by the Enterprises with relating to violations of the National Enterprises’ obligation to institute applicable laws. The extraordinary civil Flood Insurance Reform Act. statutorily mandated procedures is money penalty authority granted under OFHEO disagrees. The Enterprises subject to ongoing oversight by OFHEO NFIA does not explicitly limit or proposal to narrowly confine OFHEO’s as part of its routine examination displace the general powers of OFHEO role under the National Flood Insurance process. This rulemaking is not to enforce applicable laws using its Act would ignore OFHEO’s pervasive intended to imply any deficiency in general enforcement powers under the authority under the 1992 Safety and compliance or inadequacy of existing 1992 Act. Soundness Act to use its full array of policies or practices of the Enterprises preventative and remedial tools to under the law. Authority and Scope (§ 1773.1(a)) ensure the safety and soundness of the Fannie Mae’s third comment notes Enterprises, including compliance with Civil Money Penalties (§ 1773.3(a)), and that proposed new 12 CFR 1773.1(a) applicable federal laws and regulations. Other Available Sanctions states that the National Flood Insurance It is implausible that Congress would Freddie Mac asserted that the general Reform Act of 1994 designates OFHEO suggest a scheme that would allow grant of authority to promulgate as the federal agency responsible for violative conduct, constituting unsafe necessary regulations (granted to determining the Enterprises’ compliance and unsound practice, to go without various agencies by 42 U.S.C. 4001 note) with the National Flood Insurance sanction or remedy. does not override the National Flood Reform Act of 1994 and the National Insurance Reform Act’s implicit Flood Insurance Act of 1968. Fannie Amount of Flood Insurance Coverage limitation on OFHEO’s authority to Mae asserts that the asserted breadth of (§ 1773.2) impose penalties. In explanation, the proposed rule is overly broad Freddie Mac’s comment notes that, Freddie Mac asserts that OFHEO’s because the only compliance role with respect to the amount of required explicit statutory authority to assess Congress explicitly assigned to OFHEO flood insurance, the proposed regulation civil money penalties relating to flood with regard to those Acts is confined to reiterates the statutory requirement that insurance is limited solely to assessing 42 U.S.C. 4012a. Fannie Mae therefore the amount of flood insurance be at least penalties for patterns or practices of requests that OFHEO redraft this part of equal to the lesser of the outstanding purchasing loans in violation of an the proposed new rule to more narrowly principal balance of the loan or the Enterprise’s procedures established reference only 42 U.S.C. 4012a. maximum limit of coverage made pursuant to the National Flood Freddie Mac also argues that the law available with respect to the particular Insurance Reform Act. Freddie Mac narrowly charges OFHEO with type of property under the NFIP.
VerDate 11
Freddie Mac indicated that in competition, employment, investment, PART 1773—FLOOD INSURANCE implementing the law’s requirements productivity, innovation or on the under NFIRA it requires flood insurance ability of United States-based Sec. coverage levels at or above the statutory enterprises to compete with foreign- 1773.1 Authority and scope. 1773.2 Requirements. minimums. That is, Freddie Mac, based enterprises in domestic or foreign 1773.3 Civil money penalties. requires seller/servicers to ensure that markets. Accordingly, no regulatory borrowers maintain insurance ‘‘at least impact assessment is required and this Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4521(a)(4), 4513, equal to the higher’’ of: (a) 80% of the final rule has not been submitted to the 4536(a); 42 U.S.C. 4001 note; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note; 42 U.S.C. 4012a(f)(3), (4), (8), (9), (10). replacement cost of the insurable Office of Management and Budget for improvements, or (b) the lower of the review. § 1773.1 Authority and scope. outstanding loan balance or the full Regulatory Flexibility Act (a) Authority. The National Flood replacement cost of the improvements Insurance Act of 1968, title XII of Public (provided that the insurance never The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Law 90–448, Aug. 1, 1968, 42 U.S.C. needs to exceed the maximum amount U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that a rule 4002 et seq., and the Flood Disaster available under the NFIP). The that has a significant economic impact Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4002 Enterprise asserts that it requires such on a substantial number of small et seq., as amended by the National higher coverage because borrowers are entities, small businesses, or small Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 not fully protected against a partial loss organizations must include an initial (‘‘NFIRA’’), Public Law 103–325, Sept. under a NFIP flood insurance policy if regulatory flexibility analysis describing 23, 1994, 42 U.S.C. 4001–4129, together the policy covers less than 80% of the the regulation’s impact on small create the National Flood Insurance replacement cost of the improvements. entities. Such an analysis need not be Program (‘‘NFIP’’) which established Freddie Mac asserts that the higher undertaken if the agency has certified specific requirements applicable to the required coverage serves the best that the regulation will not have a Enterprises. NFIRA designates OFHEO interests of Freddie Mac, the borrower significant economic impact on a as the Federal agency responsible for and the public purpose of the NFIP. substantial number of small entities. 5 determining compliance by the In order to avoid any doubt as to its U.S.C. 605(b). OFHEO has considered Enterprises with these statutes and with authority to require such a higher the impact of this final rule under the reporting to Congress biannually for six coverage amount, Freddie Mac Regulatory Flexibility Act. The General years on the Enterprises’ compliance. recommends that OFHEO add a Counsel certifies that this final rule will OFHEO has the authority to issue any provision to proposed section 1773.2(a) not have a significant economic impact regulations necessary to carry out the explicitly stating that nothing in the on a substantial number of small applicable provisions of NFIRA. OFHEO regulation precludes an Enterprise from business entities. is also charged with enforcing the requiring a higher level of coverage than Paperwork Reduction Act requirements of NFIRA as to the is required by the regulation. Freddie Enterprises and provides for the Mac asserts that such a provision would This final rule does not contain any assessment of civil money penalties for assist the Enterprises in the cases in information collection requirements that violations of the procedures established which lenders or borrowers assert that require the approval of the Office of by the Enterprises pursuant to the law a higher level of coverage may not be Management and Budget under the or implementing regulations. allowed under law. Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. (b) Scope. This part sets forth the Nothing in this regulation precludes 3501 et seq.). responsibilities of the Enterprises under the asserted authority of the Enterprises NFIRA and the procedures to be used in to require additional flood insurance Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 any proceeding to assess civil money coverage. This issue of authority This final rule does not require the penalties against an Enterprise under encompasses questions of law and preparation of an assessment statement NFIRA. policy beyond the immediate in accordance with the Unfunded parameters of the published proposal Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. § 1773.2 Requirements. and request for comment. OFHEO will, 1531. Assessment statements are not (a) Procedures. Each Enterprise shall however, refrain at this time from required for regulations that incorporate implement procedures reasonably addressing the issue further absent a requirements specifically set forth in designed to ensure for any loan that is fuller exploration of the matter. The law. As explained in the preamble, this secured by improved real estate or a Enterprise or any other involved parties rule implements specific statutory mobile home located in an area that has may nevertheless seek to otherwise requirements. In addition, this rule does been identified, at the time of the clarify the issue through other not include a Federal mandate that may origination of the loan or at any time appropriate means. result in the expenditure by State, local, during the term of the loan, by the Regulatory Impact and tribal governments, in the aggregate, Director of the Federal Emergency or by the private sector, of $100 million Management Agency as an area having Executive Order 12866, Regulatory or more (adjusted annually for inflation) special flood hazards and in which Planning and Review in any one year. flood insurance is available under the This final rule is not deemed to be a List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1773 NFIP, and purchased by such entity, the significant rule under Executive Order building or mobile home and any 12866 because it will not result in (1) Administrative practice and personal property securing the loan is An annual effect on the economy of procedure, Flood insurance, Penalties, covered for the term of the loan by flood $100 million or more; (2) a major Reporting and recordkeeping insurance in an amount at least equal to increase in costs or prices for requirements. the lesser of the outstanding principal consumers, individual industries, Accordingly, for the reasons stated in balance of the loan or the maximum Federal, State, or local government the preamble, OFHEO adds 12 CFR part limit of coverage made available with agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) 1773 to subchapter C of Chapter XVII to respect to the particular type of property significant adverse effects on read as follows: under the NFIP.
VerDate 11
(b) Applicability. (1) Paragraph (a) of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION tensile stress due partly to excessive this section shall apply only with torque on the nut. respect to any loan made, increased, Federal Aviation Administration The FAA has reviewed Sikorsky Alert extended, or renewed after September Service Bulletin No. 70–03–2, dated July 22, 1995. 14 CFR Part 39 26, 1999 (ASB). The ASB describes procedures for reducing the torque on (2) Paragraph (a) of this section shall [Docket No. 2001–SW–18–AD; Amendment each nut to 45–50 ft-lbs to reduce stress 39–12561; AD 2001–25–08] not apply to any loan having an original to the beam. outstanding balance of $5,000 or less RIN 2120–AA64 We have identified an unsafe and a repayment term of one year or condition that is likely to exist or less. Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky develop on other Sikorsky Model S–70A Model S–70A and S–70C Helicopters and S–70C helicopters of the same type § 1773.3 Civil money penalties. designs. Therefore, this AD is being (a) In general. If an Enterprise is AGENCY: Federal Aviation issued to prevent excessive torque on a determined by the Director of OFHEO to Administration, DOT. nut, failure of a beam, and subsequent have engaged in a pattern or practice of ACTION: Final rule; request for loss of control of the helicopter during purchasing loans in violation of the comments. takeoff or landing. The short compliance time involved is required because the procedures established pursuant to the SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a previously described critical unsafe NFIA, as amended, or to § 1773.2, the new airworthiness directive (AD) for Director may assess civil money condition can adversely affect the Sikorsky Model S–70A and S–70C controllability and structural integrity of penalties against such Enterprise in helicopters. This action requires certain such amount or amounts as deemed to the helicopter. Therefore, within 30 inspections of each main landing gear hours time-in-service, the following be appropriate under paragraph (c) of drag beam (beam) for a crack and this section. actions are required for the beam, and removing any cracked beam before this AD must be issued immediately: (b) Notice and hearing. A civil money further flight. This action also requires • Visually inspect each beam for a penalty under this section may be reducing the torque of the jackpad crack. assessed only after notice and an mounting bolt retention nut (nut) of • If a crack is found, remove the beam opportunity for a hearing on the record each beam. This amendment is before further flight. has been provided under 12 CFR part prompted by failure of a beam due to • If a crack is suspected, dye- 1780. stress corrosion resulting from sustained penetrant inspect the beam, and if a tensile stress due partly to excessive crack is found, remove the beam before (c) Amount. A civil money penalty torque of the nut. The actions specified further flight. under this section may not exceed $385 in this AD are intended to prevent • If no crack is found, reduce the for each violation. The total amount of excessive torque of the nut, failure of a torque on the nut. penalties assessed under this section beam, and subsequent loss of control of Since a situation exists that requires against an Enterprise during any the helicopter during takeoff or landing. the immediate adoption of this calendar year may not exceed $110,000. DATES: Effective January 2, 2002. regulation, it is found that notice and (d) Deposit of penalties. Any penalties Comments for inclusion in the Rules opportunity for prior public comment collected under this section shall be Docket must be received on or before hereon are impracticable, and that good paid into the National Flood Mitigation February 19, 2002. cause exists for making this amendment Fund in accordance with 42 U.S.C. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in effective in less than 30 days. 4104d. triplicate to the Federal Aviation The FAA estimates that 3 helicopters on the U.S. register will be affected by (e) Additional penalties. Any penalty Administration (FAA), Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, this AD, that it will take approximately under this section shall be in addition 2 work hours to inspect the beam and to, and shall not preclude, any civil Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–SW– 18–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room to reduce the torque on each nut, and 2 remedy or criminal penalty otherwise work hours to replace a cracked beam. available. 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may also send comments electronically to The average labor rate is $60 per work (f) Statute of limitations. No civil the Rules Docket at the following hour. Required parts will cost money penalty may be imposed under address: 9–asw–[email protected]. approximately $18,600 per beam. Based this section after the expiration of the on these figures, the total cost impact of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to four-year period beginning on the date Terry Fahr, Aviation Safety Engineer, of the occurrence of the violation for be $56,520, assuming one beam has to Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 12 be replaced on each affected helicopter. which the penalty is authorized under New England Executive Park, this section. Burlington, MA 01803, telephone (781) Comments Invited Dated: December 13, 2001. 238–7155, fax (781) 238–7199. Although this action is in the form of Armando Falcon, Jr., SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This a final rule that involves requirements Director, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise amendment adopts a new AD for affecting flight safety and, thus, was not Oversight. Sikorsky Model S–70A and S–70C preceded by notice and an opportunity [FR Doc. 01–31166 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] helicopters. This action requires certain for public comment, comments are inspections of each beam for a crack and invited on this rule. Interested persons BILLING CODE 4220–01–U removing any cracked beam before are invited to comment on this rule by further flight. This AD also requires submitting such written data, views, or reducing the torque of the nut on each arguments as they may desire. beam. This amendment is prompted by Communications should identify the the failure of a beam due to stress Rules Docket number and be submitted corrosion resulting from sustained in triplicate to the address specified
VerDate 11
under the caption ADDRESSES. All List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 each beam, part number (P/N) 70250–32105, communications received on or before for a crack at a 3.0-inch radius around the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation upper and lower jackpad holes. the closing date for comments will be safety, Safety. considered, and this rule may be (1) If a crack is found, remove the beam. amended in light of the comments Adoption of the Amendment (2) If a crack is suspected, dye-penetrant inspect the beam, and if a crack is found, received. Factual information that Accordingly, pursuant to the remove the beam. supports the commenter’s ideas and authority delegated to me by the Note 2: Temporary Revision No. 19 of suggestions is extremely helpful in Administrator, the Federal Aviation Sikorsky Aircraft Model S–70 Maintenance evaluating the effectiveness of the AD Administration amends part 39 of the Manual, dated January 23, 2001, pertains to action and determining whether Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR the subject of this AD. additional rulemaking action would be part 39) as follows: (b) If a crack is not found while needed. accomplishing the requirements of paragraph Comments are specifically invited on PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS (a) of this AD, retorque the nut, part number the overall regulatory, economic, DIRECTIVES (P/N) MS21245–L12, on each beam as environmental, and energy aspects of follows: 1. The authority citation for part 39 (1) Restrain the jackpad and rotate the nut the rule that might suggest a need to continues to read as follows: counterclockwise to release the torque on the modify the rule. All comments Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. nut. If movement of the jackpad occurs, submitted will be available in the Rules remove and replace the sealant from the Docket for examination by interested § 39.13 [Amended] lower surface of the jackpad/beam interface. persons. A report that summarizes each 2. Section 39.13 is amended by (2) Retorque the nut to 45–50 ft-lbs. FAA-public contact concerned with the adding a new airworthiness directive to (3) Apply sealant to the nut and the immediate area. substance of this AD will be filed in the read as follows: Rules Docket. (4) After sealant has dried, touch up the 2001–25–08 Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: paint as required. Commenters wishing the FAA to Amendment 39–12561. Docket No. (5) After the paint has dried, apply a acknowledge receipt of their mailed 2001–SW–18–AD. slippage mark (of a contrasting color) to the comments submitted in response to this Applicability: Model S–70A helicopters, nut as follows: rule must submit a self-addressed, serial numbers 700029, 701129, 701322, (i) Wipe the area to be marked with a stamped postcard on which the 701325, 701327, 701329, 701331, 701333, clean-lint-free cloth. following statement is made: 701592, 701593,701594, 701595, 701613, (ii) Apply F1000 Sentry Seal, or equivalent, ‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2001–SW– 701614, 701825, 701835, 702127, and with a width of approximately one half the diameter of the nut (to a maximum width of 18–AD.’’ The postcard will be date 702129, and Model S–70C helicopters, serial numbers 70583, 70785, 70788, 70792, 70793, 3⁄16 inch) and extending a minimum of 1⁄2 stamped and returned to the 70794, 70797, 70798, 70799, 70800, 70811, inch on the base part (or to the edge of the commenter. 70812, 70813, 70830, 70831, 70836, 70837, part, whichever is smaller). The regulations adopted herein will 70848, 70855, 70856, 70867, 70868, 70879, Note 3: Sikorsky Alert Service Bulletin No. not have a substantial direct effect on 70884, 70892, 70910, 70918, 70927, 70928, 70–03–2, dated July 26, 1999, pertains to the the States, on the relationship between 70929, 70949, 70950, 70951, 70954, 70957, subject of this AD. 70958, 70959, 70965, 70966, and 701029, the national Government and the States, (c) An alternative method of compliance or certificated in any category. or on the distribution of power and adjustment of the compliance time that Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter responsibilities among the various provides an acceptable level of safety may be identified in the preceding applicability levels of government. Therefore, it is used if approved by the Manager, Boston provision, regardless of whether it has been Aircraft Certification Office, FAA. Operators determined that this final rule does not otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in shall submit their requests through an FAA have federalism implications under the area subject to the requirements of this Principal Inspector, who may concur or Executive Order 13132. AD. For helicopters that have been modified, comment and then send it to the Manager, The FAA has determined that this altered, or repaired so that the performance Boston Aircraft Certification Office. regulation is an emergency regulation of the requirements of this AD is affected, the Note 4: Information concerning the owner/operator must request approval for an that must be issued immediately to existence of approved alternative methods of alternative method of compliance in compliance with this AD, if any, may be correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. and that it is not a ‘‘significant obtained from the Boston Aircraft The request should include an assessment of Certification Office. regulatory action’’ under Executive the effect of the modification, alteration, or (d) Special flight permits may be issued in Order 12866. It has been determined repair on the unsafe condition addressed by accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 further that this action involves an this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not to operate the helicopter to a location where been eliminated, the request should include emergency regulation under DOT the requirements of this AD can be specific proposed actions to address it. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 accomplished. FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is Compliance: Required within 30 hours (e) This amendment becomes effective on determined that this emergency time-in-service, unless accomplished January 2, 2002. regulation otherwise would be previously. significant under DOT Regulatory To prevent excessive torque on a jackpad Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December mounting bolt retention nut (nut), failure of Policies and Procedures, a final 11, 2001. a main landing gear drag beam (beam), and David A. Downey, regulatory evaluation will be prepared subsequent loss of control of the helicopter and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy during takeoff or landing, accomplish the Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft of it, if filed, may be obtained from the following: Certification Service. Rules Docket at the location provided (a) With jackpad installed, using a 10X or [FR Doc. 01–31041 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] under the caption ADDRESSES. higher magnifying glass, visually inspect BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bridges to provide a safer and more the navigational hazards at New Pass efficient transit for vehicles and vessels including the difficulties involved in Coast Guard near Longboat Key. The current nighttime access into and out of the Gulf regulation governing Longboat Pass of Mexico. The comments indicated the 33 CFR Part 117 Bridge (SR 789), mile 0.0, between preferred route into and out of the Gulf [CGD07–00–006] Longboat Key and Anna Maria Key, of Mexico has changed over the years codified in 33 CFR 117.299 states that from New Pass to Longboat Pass. The RIN 2115–AE47 the draw shall open on signal, except current collected data corroborates these that from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draw will comments by showing a decrease in Drawbridge Operation Regulations: open on signal if at least 3 hours notice vessel traffic at New Pass and the Longboat Pass and New Pass, is given. This rule removes the increase in vessel traffic at Longboat Longboat Key, Florida operating regulations in 33 CFR 117.299 Pass. We are adopting, without change, AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. and requires the draw to open on signal the proposal placing the Longboat Pass ACTION: Final rule. in accordance with the general bridge Bridge on a twenty-four hour, open on operation provision in 33 CFR 117.5. signal, operation schedule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing Due to the number of comments from the regulations governing the operation motor vehicle drivers concerning the Regulatory Evaluation proposed New Pass Bridge regulation, of the Longboat Pass Bridge across This rule is not a ‘‘significant we are keeping the existing part of the Longboat Pass, Manatee County, regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of regulation in 33 CFR 117.311 which Longboat Key, Florida and changing the Executive Order 12866, Regulatory states that the Bridge shall open on regulations governing the operation of Planning and Review, and does not the New Pass Bridge, Sarasota County, signal except from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. the draw need open only on the hour, require an assessment of potential costs Longboat Key, Florida. These changes and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that will decrease vehicle and vessel traffic twenty minutes past the hour and forty minutes past the hour. The change to Order. The Office of Management and congestion. The removal and change are Budget has not reviewed it under that due to the increased vessel traffic at the the rule allows the Bridge to open on signal between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m. if at Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the Longboat Pass Bridge and the decreased regulatory policies and procedures of vessel traffic at the New Pass Bridge. least 3 hours of notice is given to the bridge tender. the Department of Transportation (DOT) DATES: This rule is effective January 17, Public vessels of the United States, (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). 2002. tugs with tows and vessels in a situation The Coast Guard expects the ADDRESSES: Comments and material where a delay would endanger life or economic impact of this proposed rule received from the public as well as property will, upon proper signal, be to be so minimal that a full Regulatory documents indicated in this preamble as passed through both bridges at any time. Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the being available in the docket are part of Discussion of Comments and Changes regulatory policies and procedures of docket [CGD07–00–006] and are DOT is unnecessary because the rule available for inspection or copying at The Coast Guard received seventy- allows the Longboat Pass Bridge to open Commander (obr), Seventh Coast Guard three comment letters addressing the on signal and will only slightly modify District, 909 SE 1st Avenue, Room 406, notice of proposed rulemaking. Sixty- the existing operating schedule for the Miami, Florida, 33131 between 7:30 one of the letters disagreed with the New Pass Bridge. a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through proposed rule changes. The comments Friday, except Federal holidays. indicated that the proposed changes Small Entities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. would create a burden for vehicular Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Barry Dragon, Project Officer, Seventh traffic. The collected data indicates that (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, at the New Pass Bridge currently opens whether this rule would have a (305) 415–6743. approximately 3 to 4 times per day, due significant economic impact on a to the extreme hazards involved with SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: substantial number of small entities. transiting through New Pass to the Gulf The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Regulatory Information of Mexico. As a result of these small businesses, not-for-profit On August 25, 2000 we published a conditions, vessel traffic through New organizations that are independently notice of proposed rulemaking entitled Pass at night is sparse. To alleviate the owned and operated and are not Drawbridge Operation Regulations; concerns expressed in these comments, dominant in their fields, and Longboat Pass and New Pass, Longboat we decided to keep the current governmental jurisdictions with Key, FL, in the Federal Register (65 FR regulations in 33 CFR 117.311 governing populations of less than 50,000. 51787). On December 7, 2000 we the New Pass Bridge and add to the published a notice of proposed regulation a provision that the bridge This rule may affect the following rulemaking reopening the comment will open on signal from 6 p.m. to 7 a.m. entities, some of which might be small period for an additional 60 days, if at least 3 hours notice is given to the entities: the owners or operators of entitled Drawbridge Operation bridge tender. vessels intending to transit under the Regulations; Longboat Pass and New Eighteen of these comments also Longboat Pass and New Pass Bridges. Pass, Longboat Key, FL, in the Federal requested a new daytime rule on the The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Register (65 FR 76956). Longboat Pass Bridge. We forwarded 605(b) that this rule would not have a these comments to the Bridge owner/ significant economic impact on a Background and Purpose operator, Florida Department of substantial number of small entities Based on the increased vessel traffic Transportation, to research and address because the rule allows the Longboat through Longboat Pass Bridge and the the feasibility of a new daytime rule. Pass Bridge to open on signal and will decreased vessel traffic through New Twelve comments agreed with the only slightly modify the existing Pass Bridge, the Coast Guard is changing rule change. The comment letters, all operating schedule for the New Pass the operating regulations for these two from the boating public, acknowledged Bridge.
VerDate 11
Assistance for Small Entities Interference with Constitutionally PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE Under section 213(a) of the Small Protected Property Rights. OPERATION REGULATIONS Business Regulatory Enforcement Civil Justice Reform 1. The authority citation for part 117 Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104– continues to read as follows: 121), we offered to assist small entities This rule meets applicable standards in understanding the rule so that they in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 49 CFR 1.46; 33 could better evaluate its effects on them Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to CFR 1.05–1(g). and participate in the rulemaking minimize litigation, eliminate 2. Section 117.311 is revised to read process. If the rule will affect your small ambiguity, and reduce burden. as follows: business, organization, or government jurisdiction and you have questions Protection of Children § 117.311 New Pass concerning its provisions or options for We have analyzed this rule under The draw of the State Road 789 compliance, please contact the person Executive Order 13045, Protection of bridge, mile 0.05, at Sarasota, need only listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Children from Environmental Health open on the hour, twenty minutes past CONTACT for assistance in understanding Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not the hour, and forty minutes past the this rule. an economically significant rule and hour from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. From 6 p.m. Small businesses may send comments does not create an environmental risk to to 7 a.m., the draw shall open on signal on the actions of Federal employees health or risk to safety that may if at least 3 hours notice is given to the who enforce, or otherwise determine disproportionately affect children. bridge tender. Public vessels of the compliance with, Federal regulations to United States, tugs with tows, and the Small Business and Agriculture Environment vessels in a situation where a delay Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman would endanger life or property shall, The Coast Guard has considered the and the Regional Small Business upon proper signal, be passed at any environmental impact of this action and Regulatory Fairness Boards. The time. Ombudsman evaluates these actions has determined under Figure 2–1, annually and rates each agency’s paragraph 32(e) of Commandant § 117.299 Longboat Pass (Removed) responsiveness to small business. If you Instruction M16475.1D, that this rule is Remove § 117.299. categorically excluded from further wish to comment on actions by Dated: December 1, 2001. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– environmental documentation. James S. Carmichael, 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). Indian Tribal Governments Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Collection of Information Seventh Coast Guard District. This rule does not have tribal [FR Doc. 01–31174 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] This rule calls for no new collection implications under Executive Order of information under the Paperwork 13175, Consultation and Coordination BILLING CODE 4910–15–U Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– with Indian Tribal Governments, 3520). because it does not have a substantial DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federalism direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the A rule has implications for federalism Coast Guard Federal Government and Indian tribes, under Executive Order 13132, or on the distribution of power and Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 33 CFR Part 165 responsibilities between the Federal effect on State or local governments and Government and Indian tribes. [CGD01–01–206] would either preempt State law or impose a substantial direct cost of Energy Effects RIN 2115–AA97 compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have We have analyzed this rule under Security Zone: Maine Yankee Nuclear determined that it does not have Executive Order 13211, Actions Power Plant, Wiscasset, Maine Concerning Regulations That implications for federalism. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Distribution, or Use. We have ACTION: Temporary final rule. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act determined that it is not a ‘‘significant SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires energy action’’ under that order because establishing a temporary security zone Federal agencies to assess the effects of it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ around the Maine Yankee Power Plant their discretionary regulatory actions. In under Executive Order 12866 and is not in Wiscasset, Maine, temporarily closing particular, the Act addresses actions likely to have a significant adverse effect all land and waters surrounding Bailey that may result in the expenditure by a on the supply, distribution, or use of Point and Foxbird Island. This security State, local, or tribal government, in the energy. It has not been designated by the zone prohibits entry into or movement aggregate, or by the private sector of Administrator of the Office of within a portion of the Back River and $100,000,000 or more in any one year. Information and Regulatory Affairs as a adjacent land areas and is needed to Though this rule will not result in such significant energy action. Therefore, it ensure public safety and prevent an expenditure, we do discuss the does not require a Statement of Energy sabotage or terrorist acts. Entry into this effects of this rule elsewhere in this Effects under Executive Order 13211. security zone is prohibited unless preamble. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 authorized by the Captain of the Port, Taking of Private Property Portland, Maine. Bridges. This rule will not effect a taking of DATES: This rule is effective from private property or otherwise have For the reasons discussed in the December 10, 2001 until June15, 2002. taking implications under Executive preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this Order 12630, Governmental Actions and CFR part 117 as follows: preamble as being available in the
VerDate 11
docket are part of docket CGD01–01– Foxbird Island and the surrounding the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine. 206 and are available for inspection or waters, as this zone only restricts These regulations are issued under copying at Marine Safety Office movement adjacent to the Bailey Point, authority contained in 33 U.S.C. 1223, Portland, Maine, 103 Commercial Street, allowing vessels to pass safely outside 1225 and 1226. the zones. Public notifications will be Portland, Maine between 8 a.m. and 4 Regulatory Evaluation p.m., Monday through Friday, except made to the maritime community via Federal holidays. notice to mariners, marine information This temporary final rule is not a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: broadcasts and signs posted informing ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Lieutenant (Junior Grade) W. W. Gough, them of the boundaries of the zones. section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of Chief, Ports and Waterways Safety Background and Purpose Branch, Port Operations Department, potential costs and benefits under In light of terrorist attacks on New section 6(a)(3) of that order. The Office Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine at York City and Washington DC on of Management and Budget has not (207) 780–3251. September 11, 2001 a security zone is reviewed it under that Order. It is not SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: being established to safeguard the Maine significant under the regulatory policies Regulatory History Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, persons at and procedures of the Department of the facility, the public and surrounding Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040; We did not publish a notice of communities from sabotage or other February 26, 1979). proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this subversive acts, accidents, or other The Coast Guard expects the regulation. Under 5 U.S.C 553(b)(B), the events of a similar nature. The Maine economic impact of this proposal to be Coast Guard finds that good cause exists Yankee Nuclear Plant is located on a so minimal that a full Regulatory for not publishing an NPRM. On peninsula, surrounded by water, making Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in it vulnerable to possible attack initiated regulatory policies and procedures of New York and Washington DC inflicted from waters surrounding the power DOT is unnecessary. The effect of this catastrophic human casualties and plant. The Maine Yankee Nuclear Power regulation will not be significant for property damage. National security and Plant presents a possible target of several reasons: there is ample room for intelligence officials warn that future terrorist attack due to the catastrophic vessels to navigate around the zones in terrorist attacks against civilian targets impact release of nuclear radiation the Back River, notifications will be may be anticipated. The Maine Yankee would have on the surrounding area. made to the local maritime community Nuclear Plant is located on a peninsula, This rulemaking establishes a security and signs will be posted informing the surrounded by water, exposing it to zone in all land and waters surrounding public of the boundaries of the zone. possible attack initiated from waters Bailey Point and Foxbird Island within surrounding the power plant. Due to the a zone beginning at position 43°57′23″ Small Entities catastrophic effect an exposure to N, 069°41′17″ W then running Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act radiation from the nuclear material southeasterly to 43°56′40″ N, 069°41′40″ (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard stored at the plant would have on the W then running west to 43°56′40″ N, considered whether this rule would surrounding area, this rulemaking is 069°41′56″ W then running north to have a significant economic impact on urgently required to prevent potential 43°57′06″ N, 069°41′56″ W then running a substantial number of small entities. future terrorist strikes against the Maine north-northeasterly to 43°57′21″ N, The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. The delay 069°41′48″ W then running north- small businesses, not-for-profit inherent in the NPRM process is northwesterly to 43°57′39″ N, organizations that are independently contrary to the public interest insofar as 069°41′52″ W then south-southeasterly owned and operated and are not it may render people and facilities to the point of origin. dominant in their fields, and within and adjacent to the Maine This rulemaking is necessary to governmental jurisdictions with Yankee Nuclear Power Plant property provide complete protection of the populations of less than 50,000. The vulnerable to subversive activity, waterfront areas of the Maine Yankee Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605 sabotage or terrorist attack. Nuclear Power Plant. This security zone (b) that this rule will not have a Under 5 U.S.C. 553 (d)(3), the Coast prohibits entry into or movement within significant economic impact on a Guard finds that good cause exists for the specified areas. This security zone substantial number of small entities. making this rule effective less than 30 also closes all lands within the zone to This rule will affect the following days after publication in the Federal prevent access along areas traditionally entities, some of which may be small Register. The measures implemented in reserved for public use between the entities: the owners or operators of this rule are intended to prevent mean low water tide line and the mean vessels intending to transit or anchor in possible terrorists attacks against the high water tide line. a portion of the Back River. For the Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, and No person or vessel may enter or reasons enumerated in the Regulatory are needed to protect the facility, remain in the prescribed security zone Evaluation section above, this security persons at the facility, the public and at any time without the permission of zone will not have a significant the surrounding communities from the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine. economic impact on a substantial potential sabotage or other subversive Each person or vessel in a security zone number of small entities. activity, sabotage and terrorists attacks, shall obey any direction or order of the either from the water or by access to the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine. Assistance for Small Entities facility by utilizing public trust lands The Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine Under subsection 213(a) of the Small between the low and high water tide may take possession and control of any Business Regulatory Enforcement lines. Immediate action is required to vessel in a security zone and/or remove Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), accomplish these objectives. Any delay any person, vessel, article or thing from the Coast Guard offers to assist small in the effective date of this rule is a security zone. No person may board, entities in understanding this rule so impracticable and contrary to the public take or place any article or thing on that they can better evaluate its effects interest. This zone should have minimal board any vessel or waterfront facility in on them and participate in the impact on the users of Bailey Point, a security zone without permission of rulemaking. If your small business or
VerDate 11
organization is affected by this final rule environmental risk to health or risk to § 165.T01–206 Security Zone; Maine and you have questions concerning its safety that may disproportionately affect Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, Wiscasset, provisions or options for compliance, children. Maine. please call Lieutenant (Junior Grade) (a) Location. The following area is a Indian Tribal Governments Wade W. Gough, Marine Safety Office security zone: All land and waters Portland, Maine, at (207) 780–3251. This rule does not have tribal surrounding Bailey Point and Foxbird Small businesses may send comments implications under Executive Order Island within a zone beginning at ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ on the actions of Federal employees 13175, Consultation and Coordination position 43 57 23 N, 069 41 17 W then ° ′ ″ who enforce, or otherwise determine with Indian Tribal Governments, running southeasterly to 43 56 40 N, ° ′ ″ compliance with, Federal regulations to because it does not have a substantial 069 41 40 W then running west to ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ the Small Business and Agriculture direct effect on one or more Indian 43 56 40 N, 069 41 56 W then running ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman tribes, on the relationship between the north to 43 57 06 N, 069 41 56 W then ° ′ ″ and the Regional Small Business Federal Government and Indian tribes, running north-northeasterly to 43 57 21 ° ′ ″ Regulatory Fairness Boards. The or on the distribution of power and N, 069 41 48 W then running north- ° ′ ″ Ombudsman evaluates these actions responsibilities between the Federal northwesterly to 43 57 39 N, ° ′ ″ annually and rates each agency’s Government and Indian tribes. 069 41 52 W then south-southeasterly responsiveness to small business. If you to the point of origin. wish to comment on actions by Environment (b) Effective date. This section is employees of Coast Guard, call 1–888– The Coast Guard has considered the effective from December 10, 2001 until REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). environmental impact of this regulation June 15, 2001. (c) Regulations. Collection of Information and concluded that, under Figure 2–1, paragraph 34(g) of Commandant (1) In accordance with the general This rule calls for no new collection Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is regulations in section 165.33 of this of information under the Paperwork categorically excluded from further part, entry into or movement within this Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– environmental documentation. A zone is prohibited unless authorized by 3520). ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine. (2) All persons and vessels shall Federalism is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. comply with the instructions of the The Coast Guard has analyzed this Coast Guard Captain of the Port, rule under Executive Order 13132 and Energy Effects Portland, Maine or designated on-scene has determined that this rule does not U. S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On- We have analyzed this rule under have implications for federalism under scene Coast Guard patrol personnel Executive Order 13211, Actions that Order. include commissioned, warrant and Concerning Regulations that petty officers of the Coast Guard on Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Significantly Affect Energy Supply, board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Distribution, or Use. We have The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Auxiliary, local, state, and federal law determined that it is not a ‘‘significant of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs enforcement vessels. energy action’’ under that order because the issuance of Federal regulations that (3) No person may enter the waters it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ require unfunded mandates. An within the boundaries of the security under Executive Order 12866 and is not Unfunded Mandate is a regulation that zone unless previously authorized by likely to have a significant adverse effect requires a state, local or tribal the Captain of the Port, Portland, Maine on the supply, distribution, or use of government or the private sector to or his authorized patrol representative. energy. It has not been designated by the incur costs without the Federal (d) In addition to 33 U.S.C. 1231 and Administrator of the Office of government’s having first provided the 49 CFR 1.46, the authority for this Information and Regulatory Affairs as a funds to pay those costs. This rule will section includes 33 U.S.C. 1226. not impose an unfunded mandate. significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Dated: December 7, 2001. Taking of Private Property Effects under Executive Order 13211. M.P. O’Malley, This rule will not effect a taking of Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 private property or otherwise have the Port, Portland, Maine. taking implications under Executive Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation [FR Doc. 01–31172 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Order 12630, Governmental Actions and (water), Reporting and record keeping BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Interference with Constitutionally requirements, Security measures, Protected Property Rights. Waterways. FEDERAL EMERGENCY Civil Justice Reform For the reasons set out in the MANAGEMENT AGENCY This rule meets applicable standards preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to in section 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 44 CFR Part 65 Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION [Docket No. FEMA–D–7517] minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS and reduce burden. Changes in Flood Elevation Protection of Children 1. The authority citation for part 165 Determinations continues to read as follows: The Coast Guard has analyzed this AGENCY: Federal Emergency rule under Executive Order 13045, Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191, Management Agency, FEMA. 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 Protection of Children from ACTION: Interim rule. Environmental Health Risks and Safety CFR 1.46. Risks. This rule is not an economically 2. Add temporary section, 165.T01– SUMMARY: This interim rule lists significant rule and does not create an 206, to read as follows: communities where modification of the
VerDate 11
base (1% annual chance) flood conditions, or upon new scientific or Regulatory Flexibility Act because elevations is appropriate because of new technical data. modified base flood elevations are scientific or technical data. New flood The modifications are made pursuant required by the Flood Disaster insurance premium rates will be to section 201 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, calculated from the modified base flood Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are required to maintain community elevations for new buildings and their and are in accordance with the National eligibility in the National Flood contents. Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. Insurance Program. No regulatory 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. flexibility analysis has been prepared. DATES: These modified base flood For rating purposes, the currently elevations are currently in effect on the effective community number is shown Regulatory Classification dates listed in the table and revise the and must be used for all new policies This interim rule is not a significant Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) (FIRMs) in and renewals. regulatory action under the criteria of effect prior to this determination for The modified base flood elevations section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of each listed community. are the basis for the floodplain September 30, 1993, Regulatory From the date of the second management measures that the Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. publication of these changes in a community is required to either adopt newspaper of local circulation, any or to show evidence of being already in Executive Order 12612, Federalism person has ninety (90) days in which to effect in order to qualify or to remain This rule involves no policies that request through the community that the qualified for participation in the have federalism implications under National Flood Insurance Program Acting Executive Associate Director Executive Order 12612, Federalism, (NFIP). reconsider the changes. The modified dated October 26, 1987. elevations may be changed during the These modified elevations, together 90-day period. with the floodplain management criteria Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the ADDRESSES: The modified base flood Reform minimum that are required. They elevations for each community are should not be construed to mean that This rule meets the applicable available for inspection at the office of the community must change any standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive the Chief Executive Officer of each existing ordinances that are more Order 12778. community. The respective addresses stringent in their floodplain are listed in the following table. List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 management requirements. The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: community may at any time enact Flood insurance, floodplains, Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards stricter requirements of its own, or reporting and recordkeeping Study Branch, Federal Insurance and pursuant to policies established by other requirements. Mitigation Administration, Federal Federal, state or regional entities. Accordingly, 44 CFR Part 65 is Emergency Management Agency, 500 C The changes in base flood elevations amended to read as follows: Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. (202) 646–3461, or (email) PART 65—[AMENDED] National Environmental Policy Act [email protected]. This rule is categorically excluded 1. The authority citation for Part 65 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The from the requirements of 44 CFR part continues to read as follows: modified base flood elevations are not 10, Environmental Consideration. No Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; listed for each community in this environmental impact assessment has Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, interim rule. However, the address of been prepared. 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, the Chief Executive Officer of the 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. community where the modified base Regulatory Flexibility Act flood elevation determinations are The Acting Administrator, Federal § 65.4 [Amended] available for inspection is provided. Insurance and Mitigation 2. The tables published under the Any request for reconsideration must Administration, certifies that this rule is authority of § 65.4 are amended as be based upon knowledge of changed exempt from the requirements of the follows:
Effective Dates and name of news- date of Community State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community modifica- No. published tion
Connecticut: Fairfield Town of Greenwich November 15, 2001, No- Ms. Lolly H. Prince, First Selectman of Nov. 5, 090008 vember 22, 2001, Green- the Town of Greenwich, 101 Field 2001. D&E wich Times. Point Road, Greenwich, Connecticut 06830. Florida: Lee ...... Unincorporated September 27, 2001, Octo- Mr. Doug St. Cerny, Chairman of the Sept. 20, 125124 E Areas. ber 4, 2001, News-Press. Lee County, Board of County Com- 2001. missioners, P.O. Box 398, Fort Myers, Florida 33902. Leon ...... City of Tallahassee September 28, 2001, Octo- The Honorable Scott Maddox, Mayor of Jan. 4, 120144 D ber 5, 2001, Tallahassee the City of Tallahassee, 300 South 2002. Democrat. Adams Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32301–1731. Georgia: Bibb and Jones City of Macon ...... September 25, 2001, Octo- The Honorable Jack Ellis, Mayor of the Jan. 1, 130011 D ber 4, 2001, The Macon City of Macon, 700 Poplar Street, 2002. Telegraph. Macon, Georgia 31201.
VerDate 11
Effective Dates and name of news- date of Community State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community modifica- No. published tion
Gwinnett ...... Unincorporated September 27, 2001, Octo- Mr. Wayne Hill, Chairman of the Sept. 20, 130322 D Areas. ber 4, 2001, Gwinnett Gwinnett County Board of Commis- 2001. Daily Post. sioners, Justice and Administration Center, 75 Langley Drive, Lawrenceville, Georgia 30045. Maine: York ...... Town of Alfred ...... September 27, 2001, Octo- Mr. Perley Yeaton, Chairperson of the Sept. 19, 230191 C ber 4, 2001, The Sanford Board of Selectmen for the Town of 2001. News. Alfred, P.O. Box 667, Alfred, Maine 04001. Knox ...... Town of St. George October 18, 2001, October Mr. John Falla, St. George Town Man- Oct. 12, 230229 C 25, 2001, Courier-Ga- ager, P.O. Box 131, Tenants Harbor, 2001. zette. Maine 04860. Maryland: Frederick ...... Unincorporated November 14, 2001, No- Mr. Ron Hart, Frederick County Man- Oct. 30, 240027 B Areas. vember 21, 2001, Fred- ager, 12 East Church Street, Fred- 2001. erick News Post. erick, Maryland 21701. Frederick ...... City of Frederick .... November 14, 2001, No- The Honorable James Grimes, Mayor of Oct. 30, 240030 B vember 21, 2001, Fred- the City of Frederick, 101 North Court 2001. erick News Post. Street, Frederick, Maryland 21701. Michigan: Wayne ..... Township of Canton October 18, 2001, October Mr. Thomas J. Yack, Township of Can- Jan. 24, 260219 B 25, 2001, The Observer ton Supervisor, 1150 South Canton 2002. & Eccentric. Center Road, Canton, Michigan 48188. New Jersey: Cape City of North Wild- October 10, 2001, October The Honorable Aldo A. Palombo, Mayor Sept. 19, 345308 E May. wood. 17, 2001, The Leader. of the City of North Wildwood, Munic- 2001. ipal Building, 901 Atlantic Avenue, North Wildwood, New Jersey 08260. New York: Monroe ... Town of Greece ..... November 29, 2001, De- Mr. John Auberger, Supervisor of the May 2, 360417 E cember 6, 2001, Greece Town of Greece, One Vince Tofany 2002. Post. Boulevard, Rochester, New York 14616. Ohio: Warren ...... City of Mason ...... September 5, 2001, Sep- The Honorable John McCurley, Mayor Aug. 30, 390559 C tember 12, 2001, Pulse- of the City of Mason, 202 West Main 2001. Journal. Street, Mason, Ohio 45040. Puerto Rico: Commonwealth ...... October 5, 2001, October The Honorable Sila Maria Calderon, Jan. 11, 720000 D 12, 2001, The San Juan Governor of the Commonwealth of 2002. Star. Puerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901. Commonwealth ...... October 12, 2001, October The Honorable Sila Maria Calderon, Jan. 18, 720000 19, 2001, San Juan Star. Governor of the Commonwealth of 2002. B&C Puerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901. Commonwealth ...... October 12, 2001, October The Honorable Sila Maria Calderon, Jan. 18, 720000 19, 2001, San Juan Star. Governor of the Commonwealth of 2002. B&C Puerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901. South Carolina: Florence ...... City of Lake City .... September 5, 2001, Sep- Mr. George Simmons, Lake City Admin- Dec. 12, 450075 D tember 12, 2001, The istrator, 202 Kelly Street, Lake City, 2001. News Journal. South Carolina 29560. Florence ...... Unincorporated September 5, 2001, Sep- Mr. Joe King, Florence County Adminis- Dec. 12, 450079 D Areas. tember 12, 2001, The trator, 180 North Irby Street MSC–G, 2001. News Journal. Florence, South Carolina 29501. U.S. Virgin Islands ... Island of St. Croix .. November 1, 2001, Novem- The Honorable Charles W. Turnbull, Oct. 25, 78000 D ber 8, 2001, The Daily Governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands, 2001. News. Government House, 21–22 Kongens Gade, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802. Virginia: Fauquier ...... Unincorporated October 18, 2001, October Mr. G. Robert Lee, Fauquier County Jan. 24, 510055 A Areas. 25, 2001, Fauquier Cit- Administrator, 40 Culpeper Street, 2002. izen. Warrenton, Virginia 20186.
VerDate 11
Effective Dates and name of news- date of Community State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community modifica- No. published tion
Henrico ...... Unincorporated October 26, 2001, Novem- Mr. Richard Glover, Chairman of the Oct. 12, 510077 B Areas. ber 1, 2001, The Rich- Henrico County, Board of Super- 2001. mond Times. visors, P.O. Box 27032, Richmond, Virginia 23273.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. Acting Administrator has resolved any environmental impact assessment has 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) appeals resulting from this notification. been prepared. Dated: December 11, 2001. The modified base flood elevations Regulatory Flexibility Act Robert F. Shea, are not listed for each community in Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance and this notice. However, this rule includes The Acting Administrator, Federal Mitigation Administration. the address of the Chief Executive Insurance and Mitigation [FR Doc. 01–31030 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Officer of the community where the Administration, certifies that this rule is BILLING CODE 6718–04–P modified base flood elevation exempt from the requirements of the determinations are available for Regulatory Flexibility Act because inspection. modified base flood elevations are FEDERAL EMERGENCY The modifications are made pursuant required by the Flood Disaster MANAGEMENT AGENCY to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, 44 CFR Part 65 and are required to maintain community and are in accordance with the National eligibility in the NFIP. No regulatory Changes in Flood Elevation Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. flexibility analysis has been prepared. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65. Determinations Regulatory Classification For rating purposes, the currently AGENCY: Federal Emergency effective community number is shown This final rule is not a significant Management Agency, FEMA. and must be used for all new policies regulatory action under the criteria of ACTION: Final rule. and renewals. section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of The modified base flood elevations September 30, 1993, Regulatory SUMMARY: Modified base (1% annual are the basis for the floodplain Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. chance) flood elevations are finalized management measures that the for the communities listed below. These community is required to either adopt Executive Order 12612, Federalism modified elevations will be used to or to show evidence of being already in This rule involves no policies that calculate flood insurance premium rates effect in order to qualify or to remain have federalism implications under for new buildings and their contents. qualified for participation in the Executive Order 12612, Federalism, EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective dates for National Flood Insurance Program dated October 26, 1987. these modified base flood elevations are (NFIP). indicated on the following table and These modified elevations, together Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice revise the Flood Insurance Rate Map(s) with the floodplain management criteria Reform (FIRMs) in effect for each listed required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the This rule meets the applicable community prior to this date. minimum that are required. They standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive ADDRESSES: The modified base flood should not be construed to mean that Order 12778. elevations for each community are the community must change any List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 65 available for inspection at the office of existing ordinances that are more the Chief Executive Officer of each stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The Flood insurance, floodplains, community. The respective addresses reporting and recordkeeping are listed in the following table. community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own, or requirements. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: pursuant to policies established by other Accordingly, 44 CFR Part 65 is Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards Federal, state or regional entities. amended to read as follows: Study Branch, Federal Insurance and These modified elevations are used to Mitigation Administration, Federal meet the floodplain management PART 65—[AMENDED] Emergency Management Agency, 500 C requirements of the NFIP and are also Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, used to calculate the appropriate flood 1. The authority citation for Part 65 (202) 646–3461, or (email) insurance premium rates for new continues to read as follows: [email protected]. buildings built after these elevations are Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The made final, and for the contents in these Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, Federal Emergency Management Agency buildings. 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, makes the final determinations listed The changes in base flood elevations 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. below of modified base flood elevations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4. § 65.4 [Amended] for each community listed. These National Environmental Policy Act modified elevations have been 2. The tables published under the published in newspapers of local This rule is categorically excluded authority of § 65.4 are amended as circulation and ninety (90) days have from the requirements of 44 CFR part follows: elapsed since that publication. The 10, Environmental Consideration. No
VerDate 11
Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.
Alabama: Autauga Unincorporated April 7, 2001, April 14, Mr. Clyde O. Chambliss, Jr., Chair- Mar. 26, 2001 ...... 010314 B (FEMA Areas. 2001, Prattville man of the County Commission, Docket No. Progress. 134 North Court Street Prattville, D–7511). Alabama 36067. Morgan City of Decatur ..... May 29, 2001, June 5, The Honorable Julian Price, Mayor of Sept. 4, 2001 ...... 010176 (FEMA 2001, The Decatur Daily. the City of Decatur, P.O. Box 488, Docket No. Decatur, Alabama 35602. D–7513). Autauga, City of Mont- March 30, 2001, April 6, The Honorable Bobby N. Bright, Mar. 22, 2001 ...... 010174 F Lowndes, gomery. 2001,The Montgomery Mayor of the City of Montgomery, Elmore & Advertiser. City Hall, P.O. Box 1111, Mont- Montgomery gomery, Alabama 36101. (FEMA Docket No. D–7509). Connecticut: New Town of Branford June 11, 2001, June 18, Mr. Anthony Daros, Town of Branford June 1, 2001 ...... 090073 C Haven (FEMA 2001, New Haven Reg- First Selectman, Town Hall, P.O. Docket No. D– ister. Box 150, Branford, Connecticut 7513). 06405. Florida: Alachua Unincorporated March 9, 2001, March 16, Mr. Randall H. Reid, Alachua County Feb. 26, 2001 ...... 120001 A (FEMA Areas. 2001, The Gainesville Manager, P.O. Box 2877, Gaines- Docket No. Sun. ville, Florida 32602. D–7509). Charlotte Unincorporated July 2, 2001, July 9, 2001, Mr. Jan Winters, Charlotte County June 25, 2001 ...... 120061 D (FEMA Areas. Charlotte Sun Herald. Administrator, 18500 Murdock Cir- Docket No. cle, Room 536, Port Charlotte, Flor- D–7513). ida 33948–1094. Manatee Unincorporated April 12, 2001, April 19, Mr. Ernie Padgett, Manatee County Apr. 4, 2001 ...... 120153 B (FEMA Areas. 2001, Bradenton Herald. Administrator, P.O. Box 1000, Bra- Docket No. denton, Florida 34206. D–7511). Monroe Unincorporated March 13, 2001, March Mr. James Roberts, Monroe County Feb. 27, 2001 ...... 125129 G (FEMA Areas. 20, 2001, The Key-West Administrator, 5100 College Road, Docket No. Citizen. Key West, Florida 33040. D–7509). Pasco (FEMA Unincorporated February 6, 2001, Feb- Mr. John J. Gallagher, Pasco County Jan. 25, 2001 ...... 120230 D Docket No. Areas. ruary 13, 2001, St. Pe- Administrator, West Pasco Govern- D–7509). tersburg Times. ment Center, 7530 Little Road, New Port Richey, Florida 34654. Seminole Unincorporated May 30, 2001 June 6, Mr. Kevin Grace, Manager of Semi- May 23, 2001 ...... 120289 E (FEMA Areas. 2001, Seminole Herald. nole County, 1101 East First Docket No. Street, Sanford, Florida 32771. D–7513). Illinois: DuPage and Village of July 6, 2001, July 13, The Honorable Roger C. Claar, June 26, 2001 ...... 170812 F Will (FEMA Bolingbrook. 2001, The Bolingbrook Mayor of the Village of Bolingbrook, Docket No. Sun. 375 West Briarcliff Road, D–7513). Bolingbrook, Illinois 60440–0951. Macon (FEMA City of Decatur ..... March 21, 2001, March The Honorable Terry Howley, Mayor June 27, 2001 ...... 170429 C Docket No. 28, 2001, Decatur Trib- of the City of Decatur, 1 Gary K. D–7511). une. Anderson Plaza, Decatur, Illinois 62523. Kendall Unincorporated April 19, 2001, April 26, Mr. John A. Church, Chairman of the July 26, 2001 ...... 170341 C (FEMA Areas. 2001, Kendall County Kendall County Board, 111 West Docket No. Record. Fox Street, Yorkville, Illinois 60560. D–7511). Cook (FEMA Village of North- June 7, 2001, June 14, Mr. Mark W. Damisch, Village of June 1, 2001 ...... 170132 F Docket No. brook. 2001, Northbrook Star. Northbrook President, 1225 Cedar D–7513). Lane,Northbrook, Illinois 60062– 4582. St. Clair Unincorporated February 15, 2001, Feb- Mr. John Baricevic, Chairman of the May 24, 2001 ...... 170616 B (FEMA Areas. ruary 22, 2001, Belle- St. Clair County Board,St. Clair Docket No. vue News-Democrat. County Courthouse, 10 Public D–7509). Square, Bellevue, Illinois 62220– 1623. Will (FEMA Unincorporated July 6, 2001, July 13, Mr. Joseph Mikan, Will County Exec- Oct. 12, 2001 ...... 170695 F Docket No. Areas. 2001, Herald-News. utive, 302 North Chicago D–7513). Street,Joliet, Illinois 60432.
VerDate 11
Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.
Noble (FEMA Unincorporated May 30, 2001, June 6, Mr. Mark Pankap, President of the Sept. 5, 2001 ...... 180183 B Docket No. Areas. 2001, The News-Sun. Noble County Board of Commis- D–7511). sioners,Noble County Courthouse, 101 North Orange Street, Albion, Indiana 46701. Lake (FEMA Town of March 20, 2001, March Mr. Richard Krame, Manager of the June 26, 2001 ...... 180142 B Docket No. Schererville. 27, 2001 The Times. Town of Schererville, 833 West Lin- D–7511). coln highway, Suite B20W, Schererville, Indiana 46375. Kentucky: Warren City of Bowling March 13, 2001, March The Honorable Sandy Jones, Mayor June 19, 2001 ...... 210219 D (FEMA Green. 20, 2001, Daily News. of the City of Bowling Green,P.O. Docket No. Box 430,Bowling Green, Kentucky D–7509). 42102–0430. Jefferson Unincorporated April 13, 2001, April 20, Ms. Rebecca JacksonJefferson Coun- July 20, 2001 ...... 210120 D (FEMA Areas. 2001, The Courier-Jour- ty Judge Executive,527 West Jef- Docket No. nal. ferson Street, Suite 400,Louisville, D–7511). Kentucky 40202. (FEMA Docket Lexington-Fayette May 30, 2001, June 6, The Honorable Pam Miller,Mayor of May 23, 2001 ...... 210067 C No. D– Urban County 2001, Lexington Herald- the Lexington-FayetteUrban County 7513). Government. Leader. Government, 200 East Main Street, 12th Floor,Lexington-Fayette Gov- ernment Building,Lexington, Ken- tucky 40507. Michigan: Macomb City of New Balti- June 20, 2001, June 27, The Honorable Joe Grajek, Mayor of June 8, 2001 ...... 260125 B (FEMA Docket more. 2001, The Bay Voice. the City of New Baltimore, City No. D–7513). Hall,36535 Green Street,New Balti- more, Michigan 48047. Minnesota: Hennepin City of Crystal ...... April 18, 2001, April 25, The Honorable Peter E. Meinstma, July 25, 2001 ...... 270156 C (FEMA 2001, Sun Post. Mayor of the City of Crystal,4141 Docket No. Douglas Drive, Crystal, Minnesota D–7511). 55422. Hennepin City of Medicine April 18, 2001, April 25, The Honorable Thomas July 25, 2001 ...... 270690 A (FEMA Lake. 2001 Sun-Sailor. Schrader,Mayor of the City of Medi- Docket No. cine Lake,10609 South Shore D–7511). Drive,Medicine Lake, Minnesota 55441. Hennepin City of Minneapolis April 18, 2001, April 25, The Honorable Sharon Sayles Belton, July 25, 2001 ...... 270172 B (FEMA 2001, Finance and Mayor of the City of Minneapolis, Docket No. Commerce. Minneapolis City Hall, 350 South D–7511). Fifth Street, Room 331, Min- neapolis, Minnesota 55415. Hennepin City of Plymouth ... April 18, 2001, April 25, The Honorable Joy Tierney, Mayor of July 25, 2001 ...... 270179 C (FEMA 2001, Sun-Sailor. the City of Plymouth, 3400 Plym- Docket No. outh Boulevard, Plymouth, Min- D–7511). nesota 55447. Mississippi: Madi- City of Ridgeland May 17, 2001, May 24, The Honorable Gene F. McGee, May 10, 2001 ...... 280110 D son (FEMA 2001, Madison County Mayor of the City of Ridgeland, Docket No. D– Journal. P.O. Box 217, Ridgeland, Mis- 7513). sissippi 39158. New Hampshire: Sullivan City of Claremont July 23, 2001, July 30, Mr. Richard Hodgkinson, City Man- July 11, 2001 ...... 330154 C (FEMA 2001, Eagle Times. ager of Claremont, 58 Tremont Docket No. Square, City Hall, Claremont, New D–7513). Hampshire 03743. Hillsborough Town of Hollis ...... June 19, 2001, June 26, Mr. Daniel McManus, Chairman of Sept. 25, 2001 ..... 330091 B (FEMA 2001, The Telegraph. the Board of Selectmen, 7 Monu- Docket No. ment Square, Hollis, New Hamp- D–7513). shire 03049. New Jersey: Burlington Township of April 19, 2001, April 26, The Honorable Augustus F. Apr. 5, 2001 ...... 340097 C (FEMA Evesham. 2001, Central Records. Tamburro, Mayor of the Township Docket No. of Evesham, Municipal Building, D–7511). 984 Tuckerton Road, Marlton, New Jersey 08053. Burlington Township of April 19, 2001, April 26, The Honorable Augustus F. Apr. 5, 2001 ...... 340097 C (FEMA Evesham. 2001, Central Records. Tamburro, Mayor of the Township Docket No. of Evesham, Municipal Building, D–7511). 984 Tuckerton Road, Marlton, New Jersey 08053. New York:
VerDate 11
Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.
Schoharie Village of February 21, 2001, Feb- The Honorable William Gilmore, Aug. 9, 2001 ...... 360743 B (FEMA Cobleskill. ruary 28, 2001, Times Mayor of the Village of Cobleskill, Docket No. Journal. Village Offices, P.O. Box 169, D–7511). Cobleskill, New York 12043. Westchester Village of May 21, 2001, May 28, Mr. R. Joseph Morgan, Larchmont Nov. 7, 2001 ...... 360915 B (FEMA Larchmont. 2001, The Journal Village Engineer, Municipal Build- Docket No. News. ing, 120 Larchmont Avenue, D–7511). Larchmont, New York 10538. Oneida City of Utica ...... May 18, 2001, May 25, The Honorable Timothy J. Julian, Nov. 7, 2001 ...... 360558 A (FEMA 2001, The Observer Mayor of the City of Utica, 1 Ken- Docket No. Dispatch. nedy Plaza, Utica, New York 13502. D–7511). North Carolina: Buncombe City of Asheville ... May 10, 2001, May 17, The Honorable Leni Sitnick, Mayor of Aug. 16, 2001 ...... 370032 C (FEMA 2001, The Asheville Cit- the City of Asheville, 70 Court Docket No. izen-Times. Plaza P.O. Box 7148, Asheville, D–7511). North Carolina 28802. Brunswick Unincorporated June 28, 2001, July 5, Mr. Marty Lawing, Brunswick County Oct. 4, 2001 ...... 370295 C (FEMA Areas. 2001, Wilmington Morn- Manager,P.O. Box 249, 45 Court- Docket No. ing Star. house Drive,Bolivia, North Carolina D–7513). 28422. Orange Town of Carrboro May 21, 2001, May 28, Mr. Robert W. Morgan, Manager of Aug. 27, 2001 ...... 370275 C (FEMA 2001, Chapel Hill Her- the Town of Carrboro,301 West Docket No. ald. Main Street,Carrboro, North Caro- D–7513). lina 27510. Wake (FEMA Town of Garner .... July 18, 2001, July 25, Ms. Mary Lou Rand, Town Manager, July 11, 2001 ...... 370240 D Docket No. 2001, The News and P.O. Box 446, 900 Seventh Ave- D–7513). Observer. nue,Garner, North Carolina 27529. Wake (FEMA City of Raleigh ..... July 18, 2001, July 25, The Honorable Paul Y. Coble, Mayor July 11, 2001 ...... 370243 D Docket No. 2001, The News and of the City of Raleigh,P.O. Box D–7513). Observer. 590,222 West Hargett Street,Raleigh, North Carolina 27602. Wake (FEMA Unincorporated July 18, 2001, July 25, Mr. David Cooke, Wake County Man- July 11, 2001 ...... 370368 D Docket No. Areas. 2001, The News and ager, Suite 1100,337 South Salis- D–7513). Observer. bury Street,Raleigh, North Carolina 27602. Ohio: Franklin Unincorporated May 16, 2001, May 23, Mr. Dewey Stokes, President of the Aug. 22, 2001 ...... 390167 G (FEMA Areas. 2001, Gahanna News. Franklin County Board of Commis- Docket No. sioners,373 South High Street, 26th D–7513). Floor,Columbus, Ohio 43215–6304. Athens (FEMA Village of Glouster March 16, 2001, March The Honorable David L. Angle, Mayor July 20, 2001 ...... 390018 B Docket No. 23, 2001, The Athens of the Village of Glouster,161⁄2 D–7511). Messenger. Front Street, Glouster, Ohio 45732. Guernsey Unincorporated April 20, 2001, April 27, Mr. Thomas J. Laughlin, President of July 27, 2001 ...... 390198 C (FEMA Areas. 2001, The Jeffersonian. the Guernsey County,Board of Docket No. Commissioners, 128 East 8th DÐ7511). Street, Suite 101,Cambridge, Ohio 43725. Lake (FEMA Unincorporated February 16, 2001, Feb- Mr. Daniel Troy, President of the May 25, 2001 ...... 390771 C Docket No. Areas. ruary 23, 2001, News- Lake County,Board of Commis- DÐ7509). Herald. sioners, 105 Main Street, Paines- ville, Ohio 44077. Lake (FEMA Unincorporated March 3, 2001, March 10, Mr. Daniel Troy,President of the Lake Aug. 9, 2001 ...... 390771 C Docket No. Areas. 2001, News-Herald. County,Board of Commis- DÐ7511). sioners,105 Main Street,Painesville, Ohio 44077. Pennsylvania: Montgomery Township of Ab- March 28, 2001, April 4, Ms. Barbara Ferrara, Presi- Mar. 16, 2001 ...... 420695 E (FEMA ington. 2001, The Record. dent,Township of Abington, Board Docket No. of Commissioners,1176 Old York DÐ7511). Road, Abington, Pennsylvania 19001. Schuylkill City of Pottsville ... April 6, 2001, April 13, The Honorable John D. W. Reiley, Mar. 23, 2001 ...... 420785 B (FEMA 2001 Pottsville Repub- Mayor of the City of Pottsville,P.O. Docket No. lican. Box 50, Pottsville, Pennsylvania DÐ7511). 17901. Puerto Rico:
VerDate 11
Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.
(FEMA Docket Commonwealth .... March 22, 2001, March The Honorable Sila Maria Calderon, June 11, 2001 ...... 720000 E No. DÐ 29, 2001, San Juan Governor of the Commonwealth 7511). Star. ofPuerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza,San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901. (FEMA Docket Commonwealth .... March 22, 2001, March The Honorable Sila Maria Calderon, June 11, 2001 ...... 720000 E No. DÐ 29, 2001, San Juan Governor of the Commonwealth of 7511). Star. Puerto Rico, P.O. Box 82, La Fortaleza, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00901. Rhode Island: City of Cranston ... March 1, 2001, March 8, The Honorable John O’Leary, Mayor June 7, 2001 ...... 445396 B Providence 2001, Cranston Herald. of the City of Cranston, City (FEMA Docket Hall,869 Park Avenue, Cranston, No. DÐ7509). Rhode Island 02910. South Carolina: Unincorporated June 20, 2001, June 27, Mr. Joey Preston, Anderson County Sept. 26, 2001 ..... 450013 B Anderson Areas. 2001, Anderson Inde- Administrator,100 South Main (FEMA Docket pendent. Street, P.O. Box 8002,Anderson, No. DÐ7513) South Carolina 29622. Kershaw Unincorporated March 21, 2001, March Mr. Gordon Hartwig, Kershaw County June 27, 2001 ...... 450115 D (FEMA Areas. 28, 2001, The Kershaw Administrator,1121 Broad Docket No. News-Era. Street,Camden, South Carolina DÐ7509). 29020. Richland Unincorporated June 28, 2001, July 5, Mr. T. Cary McSwain, Richland Coun- June 21, 2001 ...... 450170 G (FEMA Areas. 2001, The State. ty Administrator, 2020 Hampton Docket No. Street,P.O. Box 192, Columbia, DÐ7513). South Carolina 29202. Tennessee: Montgomery City of Clarksville March 23, 2001, March The Honorable Johnny Piper,Mayor June 29, 2001 ...... 470137 C (FEMA 30, 2001, The Leaf- of the City of Clarksville, 102 Public Docket No. Chronicle. Square,Clarksville, Tennessee DÐ7509). 37040. Maury (FEMA City of Columbia .. May 9, 2001, May 16, The Honorable Barbara McIntyre, Aug. 15, 2000 ...... 475423 D Docket No. 2001, Daily Herald. Mayor of the City of Columbia,707 DÐ7511). North Main Street, Columbia, Ten- nessee 38401. Williamson City of Franklin ..... April 11, 2001, April 18, The Honorable Jerry Sharber, Mayor July 18, 2001 ...... 470206 D (FEMA 2001, Review Appeal. of the City of Franklin,P.O. Box Docket No. 305, Franklin, Tennessee 37065. DÐ7511). Wilson (FEMA City of Lebanon .... June 21, 2001, June 28, The Honorable Don Fox, Mayor of Sept. 27, 2001 ..... 470208 C Docket No. 2001, The Lebanon the City of Lebanon, 200 Castle DÐ7513). Democrat. Heights Avenue North, Suite 100 Lebanon, Tennessee 37087Ð2845. Maury (FEMA Unincorporated May 9, 2001, May 16, Mr. Edward Harlam Executive for Aug. 15, 2001 ...... 470123 B Docket No. Areas. 2001, Daily Herald. Maury County, County Courthouse DÐ7511). Basement, Public Room 101, Co- lumbia, Tennessee 38401. Montgomery Unincorporated March 23, 2001, March Mr. Douglas Weiland Montgomery June 29, 2001 ...... 470136 B (FEMA Areas. 30, 2001, The Leaf- County Executive, 126 Main Street, Docket No. Chronicle. Clarksville, Tennessee 37041. DÐ7509). Virginia: Augusta Unincorporated May 25, 2001, June 1, Mr. Patrick J. Coffield, Augusta Coun- May 11, 2001 ...... 510013 B (FEMA Areas. 2001, The Daily News ty Administrator, P.O. Box 590, Docket No. Record. Verona, Virginia 24482. DÐ7511). Fauquier Unincorporated March 29, 2001, April 5, Mr. G. Robert Lee, Fauquier County July 5, 2001 ...... 510055 A (FEMA Areas. 2001, Fauquier Citizen. Administrator, 40 Culpeper Street, Docket No. Warrenton, Virginia 20186. DÐ7511). Independent City of Roanoke ... March 30, 2001, April 6, The Honorable Ralph Smith, Mayor of July 6, 2001 ...... 510130 D City (FEMA 2001, Roanoke Times. the City of Roanoke, 215 Church Docket No. Avenue, S.W., Room 452 Roanoke, DÐ7511). Virginia 24011. Prince William Unincorporated April 20, 2001, April 27, Mr. Craig S. Gerhart, Prince William Apr. 4, 2001 ...... 510119 D (FEMA Areas. 2001, The Potomac County Executive, 1 County Com- Docket No. News. plex Court, Prince William, Virginia DÐ7511). 22192. Spotsylvania Unincorporated March 30, 2001, April 6, Mr. L. Kimball Payne III, Spotsylvania Sept. 21, 2001 ..... 510308 C (FEMA Areas. 2001, Free Lance Star. County Administrator, P.O. Box 99, Docket No. Spotsylvania, Virginia 22553. DÐ7511).
VerDate 11
Dates and name of news- State and county Location paper where notice was Chief executive officer of community Effective date of Community published modification No.
Wisconsin: Pierce Unincorporated March 21, 2001, March Mr. Richard Wilhelm, Chairman of the June 27, 2001 ...... 555571 C (FEMA Docket Areas. 28, 2001, Pierce County Pierce County Board, P.O. Box No. DÐ7511). Herald. 128, Ellsworth, Wisconsin 54011.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. flood elevations and modified base September 30, 1993, Regulatory 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) flood elevations for each community Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. Dated: December 11, 2001. listed. The proposed base flood Executive Order 12612, Federalism Robert F. Shea, elevations and proposed modified base Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance and flood elevations were published in This rule involves no policies that Mitigation Administration. newspapers of local circulation and an have federalism implications under [FR Doc. 01–31032 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] opportunity for the community or Executive Order 12612, Federalism, BILLING CODE 6718–04–P individuals to appeal the proposed dated October 26, 1987. determinations to or through the Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice community was provided for a period of Reform FEDERAL EMERGENCY ninety (90) days. The proposed base MANAGEMENT AGENCY flood elevations and proposed modified This rule meets the applicable base flood elevations were also standards of Section 2(b)(2) of Executive 44 CFR Part 67 published in the Federal Register. Order 12778. Final Flood Elevation Determinations This final rule is issued in accordance List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 with section 110 of the Flood Disaster AGENCY: Federal Emergency Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, Administrative practice and Management Agency (FEMA). and 44 CFR part 67. procedure, flood insurance, reporting ACTION: Final rule. The Agency has developed criteria for and recordkeeping requirements. floodplain management in floodprone Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is SUMMARY: Base (1% annual chance) amended as follows: flood elevations and modified base areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60. flood elevations are made final for the PART 67—[AMENDED] communities listed below. The base Interested lessees and owners of real flood elevations and modified base property are encouraged to review the 1. The authority citation for Part 67 flood elevations are the basis for the proof Flood Insurance Study and Flood continues to read as follows: floodplain management measures that Insurance Rate Map available at the address cited below for each Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; each community is required either to Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, adopt or to show evidence of being community. 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, already in effect in order to qualify or The base flood elevations and 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. remain qualified for participation in the modified base flood elevations are made National Flood Insurance Program final in the communities listed below. § 67.11 [Amended] (NFIP). Elevations at selected locations in each 2. The tables published under the community are shown. EFFECTIVE DATES: The date of issuance of authority of § 67.11 are amended as the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) National Environmental Policy Act follows: showing base flood elevations and This rule is categorically excluded # Depth in modified base flood elevations for each from the requirements of 44 CFR part feet above community. This date may be obtained ground. 10, Environmental Consideration. No Source of flooding and location *Elevation by contacting the office where the maps environmental impact assessment has in feet are available for inspection as indicated (NGVD) been prepared. on the table below. FLORIDA ADDRESSES: The final base flood Regulatory Flexibility Act elevations for each community are The Acting Administrator, Federal Daytona Beach (City), available for inspection at the office of Volusia County Insurance and Mitigation (FEMADocket Nos. the Chief Executive Officer of each Administration, certifies that this rule is 7311 and D–7514) community. The respective addresses exempt from the requirements of the Atlantic Ocean: are listed in the table below. Regulatory Flexibility Act because final Approximately 450 feet FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or modified base flood elevations are northeast of the inter- Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards required by the Flood Disaster section of Harvey Ave- Study Branch, Federal Insurance and nue and Ocean Ave- Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, nue South ...... *10 Mitigation Administration, Federal and are required to establish and Approximately 300 feet Emergency Management Agency, 500 C maintain community eligibility in the east of the intersection Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, NFIP. No regulatory flexibility analysis of Hartford Avenue (202) 646–3461, or (E-mail) and Atlantic Avenue has been prepared. North ...... *13 [email protected]. Intracoastal Waterway: Regulatory Classification SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Approximately 500 feet west of the intersec- Federal Emergency Management Agency This final rule is not a significant tion of Glenview Bou- (FEMA or Agency) makes final regulatory action under the criteria of levard and Halifax Av- determinations listed below of base Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of enue North ...... *5
VerDate 11
# Depth in # Depth in # Depth in feet above feet above feet above ground. ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation in feet in feet in feet (NGVD) (NGVD) (NGVD) Approximately 700 feet Approximately 400 feet Approximately 0.8 mile east of the intersection east of the intersection north of the intersec- of San Juan Avenue of Ridge Road and At- tion of Peninsula Ave- and North Beach lantic Avenue South ... *10 nue North and Ocean Street ...... *8 Approximately 500 feet Drive ...... *12 BB–19 Canal Tributary No. east of the intersection Indian River North/Intra- 7: of VanAvenue and At- coastal Waterway: At confluence with BÐ19 lantic Avenue South ... *12 At the intersection of Canal ...... *30 Intracoastal Waterway: Ocean Drive and Pe- Approximately 150 feet Approximately 400 feet ninsula Avenue North *7 upstream of Beville west of the intersec- Approximately 1,500 feet Road/State Route 400 *30 tion of Richards Lane east of the intersection B–19 Canal: and Peninsula Drive of Conrad Drive and Approximately 1,100 feet South ...... *6 Redland Drive ...... *9 upstream of the con- At the intersection of Maps available for in- fluence of BÐ19 Canal Demott Street and Pe- spection at the New Tributary No. 3 with ninsula Drive South .... *6 Smyrna Beach City BÐ19 Canal ...... *29 Maps available for in- Hall, 210 Sams Ave- Approximately 100 feet spection at the City of nue, New Smyrna upstream of State Daytona Beach Shores Beach, Florida. Route 400 ...... *30 City Hall, Building Divi- Tomoka River: sion, 3050 South Atlantic ——— Approximately 0.8 mile Avenue, Daytona Oak Hill (City), Volusia downstream of Elev- Beach,Florida. County (FEMA Docket enth Street ...... *14 ——— No. 7311) Approximately 400 feet downstream of Inter- Edgewater (City), Atlantic Ocean: state 4 ...... *25 Volusia County Approximately 120 feet Eleventh Street Canal: (FEMA Docket No. east of the intersection At confluence with 7311) of State Route A1A Tomoka River ...... *16 Indian River North/Intra- and Volusia County/ Aproximately 2,810 feet coastal Waterway: Oak Hill corporate lim- upstream of Clyde Just on the Easterly side its ...... *11 Morris Boulevard of the intersection of Approximately 500 feet North ...... *26 Boston Road and Riv- from the southern Eleventh Street Canal Trib- erside Drive ...... *7 Volusia County/Oak utary No. 2: Approximately 100 feet Hill corporate limits At confluence with Elev- east of the intersection along State Route enth Street ...... *26 of Knapp Avenue and A1A north, then ap- Approximately 2,800 feet Riverside Drive South *9 proximately 350 feet upstream of LPGA Maps available for in- east ...... *12 Boulevard ...... *26 spection at the City of Indian River North/Intra- Just upstream of Clyde Edgewater Planning De- coastal Waterway: Morris Boulevard partment, 104 North Riv- Approximately 1,500 feet North ...... *26 erside Drive, Edgewater, southwest of the inter- At confluence of Elev- Florida. section of South enth Street Canal ——— Street and State Tributary No. 2A ...... 26 Route A1A in Volusia Eleventh Street Canal Trib- Edgewater (City), County ...... *6 Volusia County utary No. 2A: ...... Approximately 500 feet At confluence with Elev- (FEMA Docket No. 7311) east of the intersection enth Street Canal of Cheyenne Drive Tributary No. 2 ...... *26 Indian River North/Intra- and Golden Bay Bou- Approximately 2,600 feet coastal Waterway: levard ...... *8 upstream of con- Just on the Easterly side Maps available for in- fluence with Eleventh of the intersection of Street Canal Tributary spection at the Oak Hill Boston Road and Riv- City Hall, 234 South No. 2 ...... *26 erside Drive ...... *7 Shooting Range Canal: U.S. Highway 1, Oak Approximately 100 feet Hill, Florida. At confluence with east of the intersection Tomoka River ...... *13 of Knapp Avenue and ——— At a point just upstream Riverside Drive South *9 Ormond Beach (City), of Clyde Morris Boule- Maps available for in- Volusia County vard North ...... *26 spection at the City of (FEMA Docket Nos. Maps available for in- Edgewater Planning De- 7311 and D–7514) spection at Daytona partment, 104 North Riv- Beach Public Works erside Drive, Edgewater, Atlantic Ocean: Complex, Engineering Florida. Approximately 350 feet east of the intersection Department, 950 Belle- ——— vue Avenue, Daytona of Ann Rustin Drive Beach, Florida New Smyrna Beach and Ocean Shore (City), Volusia County Boulevard ...... *10 ——— (FEMA Docket No. Approximately 600 feet Daytona Beach Shores 7311) east of the intersection (City), Volusia County of Harvard Drive and (FEMA Docket No. Atlantic Ocean: Florence Street ...... *12 7311) Approximately 400 feet east of the intersection Halifax River/Intracoastal Atlantic Ocean: of 3rd Avenue East Waterway: and Atlantic Avenue South ...... *10
VerDate 11
# Depth in # Depth in # Depth in feet above feet above feet above ground. ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation in feet in feet in feet (NGVD) (NGVD) (NGVD) At the intersection of ——— Approximately 600 feet John Anderson Drive Ponce Inlet (Town), east of the intersection and St. Mark Circle .... *4 Volusia County of Venture Drive and Approximately 100 feet (FEMA Docket No. U.S. Route 1 (Ridge- east of the intersection 7311) wood Avenue South) *8 of Seville Street and Approximately 125 feet Beach Street South .... *7 Atlantic Ocean: southwest of the inter- Approximately 200 feet Approximately 300 feet section of Reed Canal west of intersection of east of the intersection Road and Ridgewood John Anderson Drive of Old Carriage Road Avenue South/U.S. and Buckingham Drive *4 and Atlantic Avenue Route 1 ...... *6 Tomoka River: South ...... *10 Maps available for in- Approximately 1.1 miles Approximately 750 feet spection at the South downstream of con- east of the Beach Daytona City Hall, 1672 fluence of of Thomp- Street and Atlantic Av- Ridgewood Avenue, son Creek ...... *5 enue South intersec- South Daytona, Florida. Approximately 1,500 feet tion ...... *12 ——— upstream of State Intracoastal Waterway: Volusia County (Unin- Route 40 ...... *10 At the intersection of corporated Areas) Misner Branch: Maura Court and Pe- (FEMA Docket Nos. At confluence with ninsula Drive South .... *7 7311 and D–7514) Tomoka River ...... *8 Approximately 2,500 feet Atlantic Ocean: Approximately 100 feet south of the intersec- Approximately 350 feet upstream of Handy tion of Beach and east of the intersection Avenue ...... *15 Sailfish Drive ...... *9 of Plaza Drive and Little Tomoka River: Maps available for in- Ocean Shore Boule- At confluence with spection at the Ponce vard ...... *10 Tomoka River ...... *10 Inlet Town Hall, 4680 Approximately 300 feet At State Route 40 ...... *28 South Peninsula Drive, southeast of the inter- Groover Branch: Ponce Inlet, Florida. section of Kingfish Av- At confluence with ——— enue and Atlantic Ave- Tomoka River approxi- Port Orange (City), nue South ...... *12 mately 1,300 feet Volusia County Approximately 500 feet downstream of (FEMA Docket No. southeast of intersec- Tymber Run Road ..... *20 7311) tion of Ocean Shore Approximately 340 feet Boulevard and north- upstream of Tymber B–19 Canal: ern county boundary .. *12 Creek Road North ...... *10 Approximately 300 feet Halifax River/Intracoastal Thompson Creek: upstream of con- Waterway: Approximately 470 feet fluence with Spruce Approximately 100 feet downstream of U.S. Creek ...... *5 southwest of the inter- Route 1 North ...... *7 Approximately 150 feet section of John Ander- Approximately 0.45 mile downstream of the son Drive and upstream of Tomoka confluence of BÐ19 Highridge Road ...... *4 Avenue ...... *8 Canal Tributary No. 5 Approximately 2,750 feet Eleventh Street Canal Trib- with BÐ19 Canal ...... *29 west of intersection of utary No. 2: B–19 Canal Tributary No. Cardinal Boulevard At confluence with Elev- 2: and Major Street ...... *9 enth Street ...... *26 At the confluence with Indian River North/Intra- Approximately 2,800 feet BÐ19 Canal ...... *28 coastal Waterway: upstream of LPGA Approximately 1,500 feet Approximately 1,000 feet Boulevard ...... *26 upstream of con- east of intersection of Just upstream of Clyde fluence with BÐ19 Pelican Place and Riv- Morris Boulevard Canal ...... *28 erside Drive ...... *7 North ...... 26 Intracoastal Waterway: Approximately 50 feet At confluence of Elev- At the intersection of west of the intersec- enth Street Canal Riverview Lane and tion of Trout Avenue Tributary No. 2A ...... 26 Simpson Avenue ...... *6 and Atlantic Avenue ... *6 Eleventh Street Canal Trib- At the intersection of Groover Branch: utary No. 2A: Portobello Drive and Approximately 1,250 feet At confluence with Elev- Riverside Drive ...... *9 upstream of Tymber enth Street Canal Maps available for in- Run ...... *10 Tributary No. 2 ...... *26 spection at the Port Or- Approximately 340 feet Approximately 2,600 feet ange City Hall, 1000 City upstream of Tymber upstream of con- Center Circle, Port Or- Creek Road North ...... *20 fluence with Eleventh ange, Florida. Tomoka River: Street Canal Tributary ——— Approximately 1.17 No. 2 ...... *26 South Daytona (City), miles downstream of Maps available for in- Volusia County confluence of Thomp- spection at Ormond (FEMA Docket No. son Creek ...... *5 Beach City Hall, Plan- 7311) Approximately 0.96 mile ning Department, 22 upstream of U.S. South Beach Street, Intracoastal Waterway: Route 92 ...... *25 Room 104, Ormond At the intersection of Little Tomoka River: Beach Florida. Sea Isle Circle and Palmetto Avenue ...... *6
VerDate 11
# Depth in # Depth in # Depth in feet above feet above feet above ground. ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation in feet in feet in feet (NGVD) (NGVD) (NGVD) At confluence with Maps available for in- Highland Brook: Tomoka River, ap- spection at the Morgan At the confluence with proximately 1,850 feet County Building Inspec- Tributary No. 25 ...... *609 downstream of Main tor’s Office, 384 Han- Approximately 1,470 feet Trail Road ...... *10 cock Street, Madison, upstream of Approximately 200 feet Georgia. Bakertown Road ...... *654 upstream of State Palm Brook: Route 40 ...... *30 MAINE Approximately 980 feet B–19 Canal: downstream of Koznits At the confluence of BÐ Princeton (Town), Road ...... *677 19 Canal Tributary No. Washington County Approximately 0.38 mile (FEMA Docket No. D– upstream of an Ac- 2 ...... *28 7512) Approximately 550 feet cess Road ...... *833 northeast of the con- Grand Falls Flowage: Tributary No. 25: fluence of BÐ19 Canal Entire shoreline within Approximately 600 feet Tributary No. 3 with the Town of Princeton *204 downstream of the BÐ19 Canal ...... *29 Lewy Lake: confluence of Forest Crescent Lake: Entire shoreline within Brook ...... *601 Approximately 6,000 feet the Town of Princeton *204 Approximately 200 feet northeast of the inter- Long Lake: upstream of Krolla section of Ducan Entire shoreline within Drive ...... *734 Road and Raulerson the Town of Princeton *204 Maps available for in- Road No. 7 ...... *7 Maps available for in- spection at the Kiryas Approximately 2.84 spection at the Prince- Joel Village Hall, 51 For- miles northeast of the ton Town Office, 15 est Road, Monroe, New intersection of Ducan Depot Street, Princeton, York. Road and Raulerson Maine. ——— Road No. 7 ...... *7 NEW HAMPSHIRE Port Jervis (City), Or- Eleventh Street Canal Trib- ange County (FEMA utary No. 2: Strafford (Town), Straf- Docket No. D–7512) At confluence with Elev- ford County (FEMA enth Street ...... *26 Neversink River: Docket No. D–7512) Downstream corporate Approximately 2,800 feet limits ...... *427 upstream of LPGA Bow Lake: Entire shoreline in the Approximately 0.05 mile Boulevard ...... *26 downstream of Main Just upstream of Clyde Town of Strafford ...... *517 Maps available for in- Street ...... *427 Morris Boulevard Delaware River: North ...... *26 spection at the Town Office, Route 202A, Downstream corporate At confluence of Elev- limits ...... *448 enth Street Canal Center Strafford, New Hampshire. Upstream corporate lim- Tributary No. 2A ...... *26 its ...... *426 Eleventh Street Canal Trib- NEW JERSEY Maps available for in- utary No. 2A: spection at the Port Jer- At confluence with Elev- Summit (City), Union vis Municipal Building, enth Street Canal County (FEMA Docket 14 Hammond Street, Tributary No. 2 ...... *26 No. D–7510) Port Jervis, New York Approximately 2,600 feet 12771. upstream of con- Passaic River: Approximately 200 feet fluence with Eleventh OHIO Street Canal Tributary upstream of Old High- No. 2 ...... *26 way 24/corporate lim- its ...... *180 Montezuma (Village), Shooting Range Canal: Approximately 0.62 mile Mercer County (FEMA At confluence with (3,250 feet) upstream Docket No. D–7512) Tomoka River ...... *13 of Stanley Avenue ...... *207 Grand Lake-St. Marys: At a point just upstream Maps available for in- At intersection of Wyatt of Clyde Morris Boule- spection at the Summit Street and Canal vard North ...... *26 City Hall, 512 Springfield Street ...... *873 Maps available for in- Avenue, Summit, New Maps available for in- spection at the Volusia Jersey. spection at the Monte- County Emergency Op- zuma Village Hall, 69 erations Center, 49 NEW YORK West Main Street, Mon- Keyton Drive, Daytona, tezuma, Ohio Florida. Kiryas Joel (Village), Or- ange County (FEMA ——— GEORGIA Docket No. D–7510) Willoughby Hills (City), Lake County (FEMA Coronet Brook: Docket No. D–7510) Morgan County (Unin- At the confluence with corporated Areas) Tributary No. 25 ...... *612 Euclid Creek North Tribu- (FEMA Docket No. D– Approximately 340 feet tary: 7510) upstream of Israel Approximately 2,800 feet Apalachee River: Zupnik Drive ...... *649 downstream of Bishop Approximately 2.98 Forest Brook: Road ...... *827 miles downstream of At the confluence with Approximately 4,020 feet State Route 186 ...... *574 Tributary No. 25 ...... *604 upstream of Lamplight Approximately 0.44 mile Lane ...... *873 Just downstream of upstream of State Route 186 ...... *623 Euclid Creek South Tribu- Schunnemunk Road .. *760 tary:
VerDate 11
# Depth in # Depth in # Depth in feet above feet above feet above ground. ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation in feet in feet in feet (NGVD) (NGVD) (NGVD) At confluence with Eu- Approximately 125 feet ——— clid Creek North Tribu- upstream of the con- Columbia (City), Lex- tary ...... *832 fluence with the Con- ington and Richland Approximately 1.1 miles garee River ...... *135 Counties (FEMA upstream of Bishop Approximately 750 feet Docket No. 7311) Road ...... *877 downstream of the Maps available for in- confluence of Six Mile Gills Creek: spection at the Creek ...... *141 Upstream side of State Route 48 (Bluff Road) *137 Willoughby Hills City Maps available for in- Hall, 35405 Chardon At the Southern Railway spection at the City Bridge ...... *138 Road, Willoughby Hills, Hall, 1800 12th Street, Ohio. Saluda River: Cayce, South Carolina. At the confluence with PENNSYLVANIA ——— the Broad and Con- Colleton County (Unin- garee Rivers ...... *155 Langhorne Manor (Bor- corporated Areas) Approximately 1,625 feet ough), Bucks County (FEMA Docket No. upstream of USGS (FEMA Docket No. D– 7295) Gage No. 2Ð1690 ...... *172 7512) Rocky Branch: Ashepoo River: Approximately 75 feet Chubb Run: Approximately 2.38 downstream of Olym- At Comly Avenue ...... *96 miles downstream of pia Avenue ...... *149 Approximately 90 feet CSX Transportation ... *8 Approximately 475 feet upstream of Gillam Approximately 225 feet upstream of Olympia Avenue ...... *197 upstream of Ritter Avenue ...... *151 Maps available for in- Road ...... *12 Congaree River (with spection at the Chessey Creek: levee): Langhorne Borough At confluence with Approximately 360 feet Building, 618 Hulmeville, Horseshoe Creek ...... *8 upstream of the CSX Langhorne Manor, Penn- Approximately 75 feet Transportation cross- sylvania. upstream of Charles- ing ...... *152 ——— ton Highway ...... *10 At confluence of Broad Middletown (Township), Edisto River: and Saluda Rivers ..... *155 Bucks County (FEMA Approximately 2,000 feet Broad River: Docket No. DÐ7512) downstream of U.S. At the confluence with Route 17 ...... *11 Saluda and Congaree Chubb Run: Rivers ...... *155 At confluence with Approximately 400 feet Approximately 1,550 feet Neshaminy Creek ...... *40 upstream of upstream upstream of the con- Approximately 90 feet corporate limits fluence with Saluda upstream of Gillam (Bamburg/Colleton) .... *92 and Broad Rivers ...... *158 Avenue ...... *197 Great Swamp: Approximately 3.84 Maps available for in- Maps available for in- miles downstream of spection at the Colum- spection at the Middle- South Jeffries Boule- bia City Hall, 1225 Lau- town Township Zoning vard ...... *21 rel Street, Columbia, and Planning Office, South Carolina. Approximately 335 feet 2140 Trenton Road, ——— Levittown, Pennsylvania. upstream of IÐ95 southbound ...... *38 Lexington County (Un- ——— Horseshoe Creek: incorporated Areas) Penndel (Borough), At confluence with (FEMA Docket No. Bucks County (FEMA Ashepoo River ...... *8 7311) Docket No. DÐ7512) Approximately 40 feet Congaree River: Chubb Run: upstream of Charles- At the county boundary *128 Approximately 70 feet ton Highway(State At the confluence of upstream of Route 64) ...... *12 Broad and Saluda Riv- Hulmeville Road ...... *62 Ireland Creek: ers ...... *155 Just downstream of Approximately 500 feet Saluda River: CONRAIL ...... *80 upstream of South At the confluence with Maps available for in- Jeffries Boulevard ...... *32 the Congaree River .... *155 spection at the Penndel Approximately 75 feet Approximately 0.95 mile Borough Office, 300 upstream of Industrial upstream of the con- Bellevue Avenue, Boulevard ...... *50 fluence with the Con- Penndel, Pennsylvania. Wolf Creek: garee River ...... *156 At confluence with Jones Congaree Creek: SOUTH CAROLINA Swamp Creek ...... *44 At the confluence with Approximately 180 feet the Congaree River .... *135 Cayce (City), Lexington Approximately 750 feet County (FEMA Docket upstream of Quail Drive ...... *65 downstream of the No. 7311) confluence of Six Mile Maps available for in- Creek ...... *141 Congaree River: spection at the Colleton Approximately 100 feet County Building Inspec- Maps available for in- upstream of the con- tor’s Office, Benson spection at the Planning fluence of Congaree Street, Walterboro, Department, County Ad- Creek ...... *135 South Carolina. ministration Building, Approximately 75 feet 212 South Lake Drive, upstream of Blossom Lexington, South Caro- Street ...... *153 lina. Congaree Creek:
VerDate 11
# Depth in # Depth in Dated: December 11, 2001. feet above feet above Robert F. Shea, ground. ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation Source of flooding and location *Elevation Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance and in feet in feet Mitigation Administration. (NGVD) (NGVD) [FR Doc. 01–31034 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] ——— Approximately 0.93 mile BILLING CODE 6718–04–P Richland County (Unin- upstream of the con- corporated Areas) fluence with the Con- (FEMA Docket No. D– garee River ...... *156 FEDERAL EMERGENCY 7506) Approximately 900 feet upstream of the con- MANAGEMENT AGENCY Gills Creek: fluence of Double At the confluence with Branch ...... *172 44 CFR Part 67 the Congaree River .... *133 Maps available for in- At the Southern Railway spection at the City Final Flood Elevation Determinations bridge ...... *138 Hall, 1053 Center Street, Rocky Branch: West Columbia, South AGENCY: Federal Emergency At the confluence with Carolina. Management Agency (FEMA). Congaree River ...... *149 ACTION: Final rule. Approximately 475 feet TENNESSEE upstream of Olympia SUMMARY: Avenue ...... *151 Selmer (City), McNairy Base (1% annual chance) Tributary G–1: County (FEMA Docket Flood Elevations (BFEs) and modified At the confluence with No. D–7512) BFEs are made final for the Gills Creek ...... *136 Cypress Creek: communities listed below. The BFEs Approximately 810 feet Approximately 1,700 feet and modified BFEs are the basis for the upstream of Bluff downstream of South Road ...... *141 Fourth Street ...... *433 floodplain management measures that Reeder Point Branch: Approximately 1,855 feet each community is required either to At the confluence with upstream of Purdy adopt or to show evidence of being Black Lake ...... *134 Road ...... *444 already in effect in order to qualify or Approximately 140 feet Crooked Creek: remain qualified for participation in the upstream side of State At the confluence with Route 48 (Bluff Road) *135 Cypress Creek ...... *439 National Flood Insurance Program Congaree River (with Approximately 0.5 mile (NFIP). upstream of levee): EFFECTIVE DATE: The date of issuance of Approximately 2.66 Highschool Road ...... *459 miles downstream of Maps available for in- the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) the confluence with spection at the City showing BFEs and modified BFEs for Gills Creek ...... *128 Hall, 144 North Second each community. This date may be Approximately 0.5 mile Street, Selmer, Ten- obtained by contacting the office where upstream of the CSX nessee. Transportation cross- the FIRM is available for inspection as ing ...... *152 VERMONT indicated in the table below. Congaree River (without ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each Woodstock (Town and levee): community are available for inspection Approximately 42.2 Village), Windsor miles upstream of County (FEMA Docket at the office of the Chief Executive mouth ...... *131 No. D–7510) Officer of each community. The Approximately 2.3 miles Ottauquechee River: respective addresses are listed in the upstream of the Approximately 550 feet table below. Southeastern Beltway upstream U.S. Route FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (West Bound) ...... *140 4 ...... *697 Spears Creek: At the upstream cor- Matthew B. Miller, P.E., Chief, Hazards Downstream side of Ja- porate limits ...... *812 Study Branch, Federal Insurance and cobs Mill Pond Road .. *221 Maps available for in- Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 500 Approximately 0.5 mile spection at Town Hall, upstream Spears C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, 31 The Green, Wood- (202) 646–3461, or (E-mail) Creek Church Road ... *311 stock, Vermont. Lake Murray: [email protected]. Entire shoreline within VIRGINIA county ...... *363 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA Maps available for in- Berryville (Town), Clarke makes the final determinations listed spection at the Richland County (FEMA Docket below of BFEs and modified BFEs for County Planning Depart- No. D–7510) each community listed. The proposed ment, 2020 Hampton Town Run: BFEs and proposed modified BFEs were Street, Columbia, South Approximately 1,220 feet published in newspapers of local Carolina. downstream of circulation and an opportunity for the ——— Springsbury Road (State Route 613) ...... *553 community or individuals to appeal the West Columbia (City), Approximately 80 feet Lexington County proposed determinations to or through upstream of Lincoln the community was provided for a (FEMA Docket No. Avenue ...... *599 7311) period of ninety (90) days. The Maps available for in- Congaree River: spection at the Town of proposed BFEs and proposed modified Approximately 1,250 feet Berryville Office, 23 East BFEs were also published in the Federal upstream of Blossom Main Street, Berryville, Register. Street ...... *153 Virginia. This final rule is issued in accordance Approximately 220 feet downstream of Jarvis with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Klapman Boulevard .... *154 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, Saluda River: 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) and 44 CFR part 67.
VerDate 11
FEMA has developed criteria for Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is #Depth in floodplain management in floodprone amended to read as follows: feet above ground. areas in accordance with 44 CFR part Source of flooding and location *Elevation 60. PART 67—[AMENDED] in feet Interested lessees and owners of real (NGVD). property are encouraged to review the 1. The authority citation for part 67 Maps are available for inspec- proof Flood Insurance Study and FIRM continues to read as follows: tion at Newton County Court- house, Emergency Manage- available at the address cited below for Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; each community. ment Office, 101 South Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, Wood Street at Main Street, The BFEs and modified BFEs are 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, Neosho, Missouri. made final in the communities listed 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. ——— below. Elevations at selected locations § 67.11 [Amended] Grandby (City), Newton in each community are shown. County, (FEMA Docket National Environmental Policy Act 2. The tables published under the No. B–7270) authority of § 67.11 are amended as This rule is categorically excluded Culpepper Creek: follows: Approximately 400 feet up- from the requirements of 44 CFR part stream of confluence with 10, Environmental Consideration. No #Depth in Shoal Creek ...... *1,034 environmental impact assessment has feet above Approximately 100 feet been prepared. Source of flooding and location ground. downstream of Old County *Elevation Highway E ...... *1,050 in feet Regulatory Flexibility Act (NGVD). Approximately 120 feet up- stream of Main Street ...... *1,072 The Acting Administrator, Federal CALIFORNIA Wolf Creek: Insurance and Mitigation Approximately 3,450 feet Administration certifies that this rule is Martinez (City), Contra downstream of Vance exempt from the requirements of the Costa County, (FEMA Street ...... *1,048 Regulatory Flexibility Act because final Docket No. B–7408) Approximately 1,150 feet up- or modified BFEs are required by the stream of Vance Street ..... *1,082 Arroyo Del Hambra Creek: Maps are available for inspec- Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Just upstream of John Muir tion at the City of Grandby, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and are required to Parkway ...... *116 City Hall, 302 North Main Approximately 2, 000 feet up- Street, Grandby, Missouri. establish and maintain community stream of Alhambra Ave- eligibility in the NFIP. No regulatory nue ...... *180 OREGON flexibility analysis has been prepared. Line A. DA–40: Approximately 950 feet Regulatory Classification Gresham (City), Multnomah downstream of Howe Road *22 County, (FEMA Docket This final rule is not a significant Approximately 75 feet down- No. B7417) stream of Howe Road ...... *23 regulatory action under the criteria of Maps are available for in- Kelly Creek: section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of spection at City of Martinez, Approximately 130 feet September 30, 1993, Regulatory City Hall, 525 Henrietta downstream of Division Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735. Street, Martinez, California. Street ...... *335 Approximately 400 feet up- Executive Order 12612, Federalism MISSOURI stream of NE Kane Road .. *353 Approximately 410 feet This rule involves no policies that Newton County (Unincor- downstream of SE El Ca- have federalism implications under porated Areas), (FEMA mino Drive ...... *355 Executive Order 12612, Federalism, Docket No. B–7258) Approximately 430 feet up- dated October 26, 1987. Culpepper Creek: stream of Powell Valley Approximately 1,150 feet Road ...... *387 Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice downstream of Webert Approximately 670 feet Reform Road ...... *1,037 downstream of SE Approximately 100 feet Ironwood Way ...... *416 This proposed rule meets the downstream of Old County Approximately 630 feet up- applicable standards of section 2(b)(2) of Highway East ...... *1,050 stream of 282nd Street ..... *446 Executive Order 12778. Approximately 2,800 feet up- Maps are available for in- stream of Main Street ...... *1,075 spection at the Community List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 Wolf Creek: and Economic Development At confluence with Culpepper Department, 1333 NW East- Administrative practice and Creek ...... *1,044 man Parkway, Gresham, Or- procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting Approximately 3,050 feet up- egon. and recordkeeping requirements. stream of confluence with *1,059
#Depth in feet above ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation in Communities affected feet (NGVD).
IOWA
FEMA Docket No. (B–7401) Missouri River: Approximately 5.3 miles downstream of McCandles Cleghorn outlet ...... *1,032 Monona County (Uninc. Areas). Approximately 17.9 miles upstream of Iowa Highway 175(I) ...... *1,065 Monona County (Uninc. Areas).
VerDate 11
#Depth in feet above ground. Source of flooding and location *Elevation in Communities affected feet (NGVD).
McCandless Cleghorn Drainage Ditch: At its confluence with the Missouri River ...... *1,039 Monona County (Uninc. Areas). At 235th Street ...... *1,044 Monona County (Uninc. Areas), City of Onawa. Approximately 1,000 feet downstream of 220th Street ...... *1,051 Monona County (Uninc. Areas), City of Onawa. At intersection of West Street and Walnut Street ...... *1,058 Monona County (Uninc. Areas), City of Whiting. Approximately 1,400 feet upstream of County Highway 45 ...... *1,061 Monona County (Uninc. Areas), City of Whiting. Just downstream of County Highway 45 ...... *1,063 Monona County (Uninc. Areas).
ADDRESSES Monona County (Unincorporated Areas) Maps are available for inspection at the Monona County Zoning Office, Chairman, Monona County Board of Supervisors, 610 Iowa Avenue, Onawa, Iowa. City of Onawa Maps are available for inspection at the Leon Valley City Hall, 914 Diamond Street, Onawa, Iowa. City of Whiting Maps are available for inspection at City Hall, 605 Whittier Street, Whiting, Iowa.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. operation of certain DTV stations and C804, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) establishes guidelines for television DC 20554, or via the Internet to Dated: December 11, 2001. stations that may seek an extension of [email protected]. Robert F. Shea, the deadlines for construction of DTV FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance and facilities. Our intention in revising some Mitigation Administration. Matthews, Policy and Rules Division, of the decisions reached in the Report Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418–2130. [FR Doc. 01–31033 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] and Order is to revise certain For additional information concerning BILLING CODE 6718–04–P requirements that may be having the the information collections contained in unintended consequence of hindering, this document, contact Judy Boley at rather than furthering, the DTV 202–418–0214, or via the Internet at FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS transition, and to prioritize those [email protected]. COMMISSION elements most important to the transition. The decisions reached in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 47 CFR Part 73 document should maximize the number summary of the Commission’s Memorandum Opinion and Order on [MM Docket No. 00–39; FCC 01–330] of DTV stations providing service to at least all consumers in their community Reconsideration (MO&O), FCC 01–330, Broadcast Services; Digital Television of license by allowing DTV stations to adopted November 8, 2001, released go on the air initially with lower- November 15, 2001. The full text of the AGENCY: Federal Communications powered, and therefore less expensive, Commission’s MO&O is available for Commission. facilities. inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Dockets ACTION: Final rule. DATES: The decisions and rules adopted Branch (Room TW–A306), 445 12th herein shall be effective February 19, SUMMARY: This document resolves a Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The 2002, except for FCC Form 337 which number of petitions for reconsideration complete text of this MO&O may also be contains information collection of the Federal Communications purchased from the Commission’s copy requirements that have not been Commissions’ Report and Order and contractor, Qualex International, (202) approved by OMB. Written comments Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making 863–2893, 445 12th Street, SW., Room on this new information collection are (R&O). This document addresses a CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554. The due February 19, 2002. The FCC will number of issues related to the text of the MO&O is also available from publish a document announcing the conversion of the nation’s broadcast the FCC’s Internet website: www.fcc.gov. effective date of FCC Form 337 once television system from analog to digital OMB approval is received. This form television (DTV), including when to Paperwork Reduction Act appears as an appendix to this require election by licensees of their This MO&O contains either a new or document. post-transition DTV channel, whether to modified information collection. It will require replication by DTV licensees of ADDRESSES: Federal Communications be submitted to the Office of their NTSC Grade B service contours, Commission, Washington, DC, 20554. In Management and Budget (OMB) for whether to require DTV licensees to addition to filing comments with the review under Section 3507(d) of the place enhanced service contours over Office of the Secretary, a copy of any PRA. The Commission, as part of its their principal communities, and how to comments on the information continuing effort to reduce paperwork process mutually exclusive collections contained herein should be burdens, invites the general public and applications. The document also submitted to Judy Boley, Federal other government agencies to comment modifies the minimum hours of Communications Commission, Room 1– on the information collection contained
VerDate 11
in this MO&O as required by the R&O, affirm other decisions, and addition, to provide broadcasters with Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, provide clarification of certain rules and an incentive to provide full replication Public Law 104–13. Public and agency policies. We also modify, on our own of NTSC coverage with DTV service, we comments are due February 19, 2002. motion, the minimum hours of determined that, after December 31, Comments should address: (a) Whether operation of certain DTV stations and 2004, whatever portion of a commercial the new or modified collection of establish guidelines for television broadcaster’s NTSC Grade B contour is information is necessary for the proper stations that may seek an extension of not replicated with its digital television performance of the functions of the our deadlines for construction of DTV signal will cease to be protected in the Commission, including whether the facilities. We will resolve several major DTV Table of Allotments. information shall have practical utility; technical issues raised in the R&O, Noncommercial DTV licensees were (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s including the issues of receiver given until December 31, 2005 in which burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance performance standards, DTV tuners, to replicate or lose such DTV the quality, utility, and clarity of the revisions to the ATSC transmission interference protection. We also information collected; and (d) ways to standard (including the PSIP standard), imposed a principal community minimize the burden of the collection of and labeling requirements for television coverage requirement that is stronger information on the respondents, receivers, in a separate R&O. than the DTV service contour requirement that we adopted as an including the use of automated II. Background collection techniques or other forms of initial obligation in the Fifth R&O. This information technology. 2. In the Commission’s digital new city-grade service requirement, OMB Control Number: 3060–XXXX. television proceeding (MM Docket No. which becomes effective December 31, Title: Application for Extension of 87–268), we indicated our intention to 2004 for commercial stations and Time to Construct a Digital Television hold periodic reviews of the progress of December 31, 2005 for noncommercial Broadcast Station. the conversion to digital television and stations, was intended to improve the Form No.: FCC 337. to make any mid-course corrections availability of service in the community Type of Review: New collection. necessary to ensure the success of that of license and to prevent undue Respondents: Business or other for- conversion. In the Fifth Report and migration of stations from their profit; not-for-profit institutions. Order in MM Docket 87–268 (63 FR communities of license. Number of Respondents: 600 (400 135461, May 20, 1998) (Fifth R&O), we 4. In addition, in our R&O we adopted extensions; 200 requests for special stated that we would conduct such a DTV application cut-off procedures and temporary authority). review every two years in order to determined how we would resolve any Estimated Time per Response: 1.5 ‘‘ensure that the introduction of digital mutually exclusive applications. We hours extensions (0.5 hours respondent; television and the recovery of spectrum also made a number of technical 1 hour attorney); 4.0 hours. STA (1 hour at the end of the transition fully serves decisions, including our determination respondent; 1 hour attorney; 2 hours the public interest.’’ We commenced that there is no persuasive information consulting engineer). this first periodic review with a Notice to indicate that there is any deficiency Total Annual Burden: 400 hours. of Proposed Rule Making in MM Docket in the 8-VSB modulation system of the Total Annual Costs: $207,000. 00–39 (65 FR 15600, March 23, 2000) DTV transmission standard that would Needs and Uses: The MO&O revises (NPRM), adopted March 6, 2000. In the warrant adding COFDM to the current the circumstances under which an NPRM, we invited comment on a standard. Finally, we declined to adopt extension of time to construct a digital number of issues that we considered technical performance standards for television broadcast station can be essential to resolve in order to ensure DTV receivers, although we indicated requested. The Commission has continued progress on the conversion. we would continue to monitor receiver developed the FCC 337 to be used by We also sought comment generally on issues throughout the transition and DTV permittees to apply for an various aspects of the transition, such as would take appropriate action on extension of time. Applicants must the pace of DTV receiver sales and the receiver standards if necessary. retain documentation fully detailing and availability of financing for digital 5. Upon further consideration, and supporting their representations made facilities. after careful review of the petitions for 3. Based on the comments we on this form. In addition, the MO&O reconsideration, we believe that some of received in response to the NPRM, we adopted a provision for special the requirements that we adopted in the made a number of determinations in the temporary authority for licensees that R&O may be having the unintended R&O that we believed would further consequence of hindering, rather than have not been granted a construction progress on the transition. Among other furthering, the DTV transition. In permit for allotted or maximized DTV things, we established a December 31, particular, we believe that the facilities to commence digital 2003 deadline by which commercial Commission’s current channel election operations. The request for special television stations that have both their and replication requirements and temporary authority must specify the NTSC and DTV operations on in-core deadlines may be imposing substantial technical facilities requested. The data channels must elect which of their two burdens on broadcasters without is used by FCC staff to determine, on a core channels to use for DTV operations sufficient countervailing public benefits, case-by-case basis, whether a after the transition. We gave non- and may in fact be contributing to broadcaster should be afforded commercial stations that have both their difficulties faced by a substantial additional time to construct its facilities NTSC and DTV operations on in-core number of stations in meeting their DTV and to ensure that operation will not channels until the end of 2004 to elect construction deadlines. exceed allotted parameters. their post-transition DTV channel. We 6. The DTV build-out dates have Synopsis of Memorandum Opinion and determined that this early channel passed for the top-30-market major Order on Reconsideration election would allow us to identify network affiliate stations. As of more quickly channels that will be September 2001, thirty-seven of the 40 I. Introduction available to accommodate DTV major network affiliate stations in the 1. In this MO&O, we revise a number licensees with out-of-core transition top 10 television markets are on the air of the determinations we made in the channels as well as new entrants. In with DTV service, 36 with licensed
VerDate 11
facilities and one with special 9. As discussed more fully below, therefore less expensive, facilities, while temporary authority (‘‘STA’’). In upon reconsideration we have decided also providing broadcasters additional addition, 71 of the 79 major network to allow stations to construct initial time to consider their post-transition affiliate stations in markets 11–30 are DTV facilities designed to serve at least facilities. The reduced build-out providing digital service, 61 with their communities of license, while still requirements we adopt today will allow licensed facilities and 10 with STAs. By retaining DTV interference protection to broadcasters to save both on May 1, 2002, all remaining commercial provide full replication at a later date. construction and operating costs, television stations are required to Thus, we will temporarily defer the including lower power expenses. complete construction and commence replication protection and channel Indeed, the ability to transmit at lower DTV operations. Noncommercial election deadlines we established in the power may permit many of these stations have until May 1, 2003 to R&O. In our next periodic review of the stations to transmit from existing complete construction. progress of the DTV transition, we towers, rather than being forced to build 7. The National Association of intend to establish a firm date by which new facilities immediately. In addition, Broadcasters (NAB) recently conducted broadcasters must either replicate their we will allow DTV stations that are not a survey of all full-power commercial NTSC service areas or lose DTV service yet required to be on the air with a TV stations to determine how many protection of the unreplicated areas, and digital signal—i.e., those that are subject anticipate they will have a digital signal by which broadcasters with two in-core to the May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003 on the air by May 2002. The results of allotments must elect which channel deadlines, including stations subject to the survey show that more than two they will eventually use at the end of those deadlines that are currently on the thirds (68.2%) of responding stations the transition. These replication air early—to operate initially at a reported that they either are operating protection and channel election reduced schedule by providing, at a now in digital format or expect to have deadlines may be earlier than but will minimum, a digital signal during prime a digital signal on the air by May 2002. in no event be later than the latest of time hours, consistent with their Stations that anticipate meeting the either the end of 2006 or the date by simulcast obligations. This is consistent deadline would provide at least one which 85% of the television households with our recognition that such stations, digital signal by next May in 164 in a licensee’s market are capable of as an initial matter, may need the television markets. According to the receiving the signals of digital broadcast flexibility to adopt a more graduated NAB, these markets include 95.8 % of stations. During the next periodic approach to the transition. We believe all television households. review, we intend to develop a record that this approach may permit more 8. While these survey results are on the progress of the transition and stations to meet the build-out deadlines encouraging, it nonetheless appears that how such progress relates to such issues and help advance the digital transition. slightly less than one-third (31.8%) of as band clearing and the goal of the This minimum will effectively be all stations responding to the NAB rapid recovery of spectrum for public increased under the Commission’s survey anticipate that they will not be safety and other wireless services, as existing simulcast obligations, which able to provide a digital signal by the well as other issues related to the require DTV licensees to simulcast 50% May 2002 deadline. A larger percentage successful conclusion of the DTV of their analog schedule by April 1, (81.9%) of responding stations in the transition. In order to provide parity to 2003, 75% of their analog schedule by top 50 markets anticipate that they will analog UHF stations, we will also allow April 2004, and 100% of their analog meet the deadline, while a smaller these stations to construct initial schedule by April 2005. Stations that percentage (49.1%) of stations in facilities that serve their principal were subject to the earlier construction markets 100 and above indicated they communities while retaining for the deadlines (top four network affiliates in will complete construction on time. time being DTV interference protection the top thirty markets) will remain Three-quarters of those stations that do to their maximized service areas, subject subject to the previous rule—i.e., they not anticipate meeting the May 2002 to the interference protection deadline must operate their DTV station at any deadline indicated they plan to seek an we intend to establish in the next time that the analog station is operating. extension of this deadline from the FCC. periodic review. We will not alter, This distinction is consistent with our Generally, smaller market broadcasters however, our decision to require prior treatment of these stations. In that filed petitions in this proceeding stations to provide a stronger signal to establishing earlier build-out deadlines assert that they are unable to obtain their communities of license than that for these stations in the Fifth R&O, we financing to construct DTV facilities adopted as an initial requirement in the noted that ‘‘the most viewed stations in sufficient to replicate their analog Fifth R&O. As established in the R&O, the largest television markets can be service area. These broadcasters also this new city-grade service requirement expected to lead the transition to DTV’’ claim that they will not have sufficient will become effective December 31, and that these stations are ‘‘likely to operational experience by December 2004 for commercial stations and have substantial revenues that may be 2004 to determine which core channel December 31, 2005 for noncommercial used to fund the conversion.’’ is superior for DTV transmission. stations. 11. In the end, we believe that Broadcasters that are not capable of 10. Our intention in making these reconsidering these rules will help constructing full replication facilities by revisions to the decisions reached in the further the DTV transition while the deadline established in the R&O R&O is to prioritize those elements that actually promoting the goals of may be postponing construction are most important to the DTV replication and of maximizing the altogether. Thus, while the transition. At this point, we believe our digital service provided to the public. Commission’s current replication primary goal should be to maximize the Getting more stations on the air will deadline was intended to provide an number of DTV stations providing help drive DTV set penetration. incentive to stations to construct DTV service to at least all consumers in their Increasing the number of DTV sets in facilities capable of reaching their entire community of license. Relaxing our production and in the hands of service area, this deadline may in fact be channel election and replication consumers will bring prices down and causing stations to delay construction, requirements will allow stations to go provide an incentive for content thus slowing transition progress. on the air with lower-powered, and producers and advertisers to invest in
VerDate 11
DTV. Ultimately, an expanding DTV temporarily defer the imposition of a greater flexibility to increase digital marketplace will help further the channel election deadline until the next power and hours of service over time, expansion of DTV into unserved areas periodic review. We intend to monitor we believe stations must be given an in the future. closely the progress of the transition opportunity to increase power and gain and, based on developments between experience at those higher power levels III. Issue Analysis now and the conclusion of the next before they can make an educated A. Channel Election review, we will establish a channel choice about which of their two 12. After the transition, DTV service election deadline that may be earlier channels will provide optimal DTV will be limited to a ‘‘core spectrum’’ than but in no event will be later than service. We believe that this concern consisting of current television channels the latest of either the end of 2006 or the outweighs the benefits we discussed in 2 through 51. Although some stations date by which a market meets the 85% the R&O that would result from an early received transition channels out of the digital penetration target. We believe election date. Accordingly, we will that this action is consistent with, and core, and a few have both their NTSC temporarily defer the imposition of an necessitated by, our decision today to and DTV channels outside the core, we election deadline until the next periodic allow stations to construct initial DTV believe that there will be sufficient review. facilities designed to serve their spectrum so that at the end of the communities of license, while still B. Replication and Maximization transition all DTV stations will be preserving DTV interference protection operating on core channels. However, as 1. Replication to provide full replication or we indicated in the R&O, it now appears 17. We established NTSC service maximization service at a later date. replication as a goal in the creation of that there will be more out of core 15. We expect that a number of the initial DTV Table of Allotments. stations that must be accommodated stations will choose to meet our May Each DTV channel allotment was with a core channel than we initially 2002 construction deadline by building anticipated because new applicants will less than full facilities initially, or by chosen to best allow its DTV service to be allowed to convert their single NTSC operating at lower power, and match the Grade B service contour of channels to DTV operation and those on increasing power over time in relation the NTSC station with which it was NTSC and DTV channels outside the to the demand for digital programming. paired. As we stated in the R&O, we core will be provided a post-transition We are today permitting stations to continue to believe that this approach channel inside the core. Also, the recent commence service with facilities that provides important benefits to both establishment of primary Class A meet the minimum requirements set viewers and broadcasters and ‘‘will television stations may limit availability forth in § 73.625(a)(1) of our rules. By ensure that broadcasters have the ability of core channels in some areas. December 31, 2004, commercial stations to reach the audiences that they now 13. These factors influenced our must meet the increased city-grade serve and that viewers have access to decision in the R&O to mandate early signal strength requirements we the stations that they can now receive election of DTV channels for that imposed in the R&O. Noncommercial over-the-air.’’ category of licensees with both their stations have until December 31, 2005 to 18. In the R&O, we stated our NTSC and DTV channels within the meet this city-grade service obligation. expectation that DTV broadcasters core. Specifically, we gave commercial At the same time, on our own motion, would eventually choose to replicate television licensees with both their we will allow television stations subject their NTSC service areas to serve their NTSC and DTV operations on in-core to the May 1, 2002 and May 1, 2003 viewers. However, we concluded we channels until December 31, 2003 to DTV construction deadlines to operate would not require replication because decide which of their two in-core digitally at a reduced schedule by we wanted to give broadcasters a channels to use for DTV operations after providing, at a minimum, a digital measure of flexibility as they build their the transition. We noted that this is signal during prime time as specified in DTV facilities to collocate their more than one and a half years after the § 79.3(a)(6) of our rules. With respect to antennas at common sites, thus last commercial station construction these stations, this replaces our current minimizing potential local difficulties deadline (i.e., May 1, 2002), and stated rule that requires that DTV licensees locating towers and eliminating the cost our belief that this gave stations time in and permittees transmit at least one of building new towers. We also which to decide which of their two in- DTV signal at any time the licensee or recognized, among other things, that, in core channels would be most suitable permittee transmits an analog signal. the absence of a Commission-mandated for use in digital broadcasting. We This modified rule does not reduce the replication requirement and because we stated that setting this channel election simulcast obligations of these licensees, provided licensees a certain amount of deadline would enable us to determine described in § 73.624(f) of our rules. transmitter location flexibility, some at an early date, on a market-by-market Thus, for example, by April 1, 2003, a licensees may have already built their basis, what in-core channels would be DTV station that was required to be on initial DTV facilities in locations that available for use by stations having two the air by May 1, 2002 must provide a are unsuitable for full replication. out-of-core channels. We also stated our digital signal at least 50 percent of the 19. While we concluded we would belief that an early final channel time it transmits an analog signal, and not expressly require full replication of election would help speed the transition under the requirements of § 73.624(b)(i), NTSC coverage with DTV service, we by making the final local channel a portion of the simulcasting must occur determined we would provide an alignments clear. We gave non- during prime time. incentive to broadcasters to provide commercial stations that have both their 16. We believe that permitting such replication in order to assure that NTSC and DTV operations on in-core stations to elect a more graduated viewers do not lose service and to speed channels until the end of 2004 to elect approach to providing DTV service will the transition. Specifically, we decided their channels, or more than one and a foster the early introduction of DTV to cease to give DTV interference half years after their construction service to core service areas, and allow protection to commercial broadcasters’ deadline (i.e., May 1, 2003). stations to grow into their full DTV unreplicated service areas as of 14. As we indicated above, upon facilities as the transition progresses. December 31, 2004. Thus, under the reconsideration we have determined to Because we are permitting stations decision we reached in the R&O,
VerDate 11
commercial broadcasters that did not license will ensure that, for most maximization authorizations or lose replicate their NTSC Grade B service stations, the majority of their analog DTV service protection to the uncovered area as of that date left the unreplicated service populations will receive initial portions of those areas. As with the portions of their DTV service area digital service. Once all broadcast channel election and replication unprotected in the DTV Table of stations have commenced at least the deadlines for allotted DTV facilities Allotments against other DTV minimal level of service to their discussed above, this deadline for broadcasters seeking to maximize their communities, we believe that DTV set completion of maximization facilities own service areas or analog full or low- penetration levels will increase and may be earlier than but will not be later power broadcasters, including Class A marketplace forces will work to further than the latest of either the end of 2006 licensees, seeking to expand the service speed the transition and provide an or the date by which 85% digital area of their existing stations. We gave incentive to broadcasters to expand to penetration is achieved. noncommercial DTV licensees until provide service to outlying areas. We are 24. By the action we take today, we December 31, 2005 to replicate or lose hopeful that this approach will prompt give DTV licensees seeking to maximize interference protection. broadcasters to build out to their facilities the same flexibility to 20. As we indicated above, upon allotted power in response to consumer implement graduated construction plans reconsideration we have decided to demand and competition from other as licensees of facilities specified in the temporarily defer until the next periodic stations. Thus, we will continue to DTV Table of Allotments. Thus, review the replication deadlines protect the replication service areas in licensees seeking to maximize may established in the R&O. We agree with the DTV Table of Allotments until the choose initially to construct and operate those petitioners who believe that, even replication protection deadline we digital facilities that provide service as an incentive, a fixed date of 2004 (or establish in our subsequent periodic only to their communities of license 2005 for noncommercial stations) may review. while retaining assurance that the be too soon to reasonably expect all maximized coverage area will be stations to have constructed full 2. Maximization available in the future, until the replication facilities. However, during 22. We agree with those petitioners deadline established in the next the next periodic review of the progress that argue that licensees seeking to periodic review. We agree that this of the DTV transition, we will establish construct maximized DTV facilities flexibility is especially important for a new interference protection deadline should be treated the same for purposes UHF analog licensees that may face that, as with the channel election of interference protection as licensees greater financial difficulty in deadline discussed above, may be seeking to construct allotted DTV constructing digital facilities than their earlier than but will not be later than the facilities. Our goal in permitting DTV analog VHF counterparts. We believe end of 2006 or the date by which a stations to apply to maximize was to that providing flexibility to stations market meets the 85% digital ensure that they could increase their seeking to maximize will help speed the penetration target, whichever is later. DTV signal coverage and provide DTV transition by allowing them to Our consideration of the issue of the service competitively within their implement digital service with less appropriate interference protection respective markets. The Commission costly facilities initially while still deadline during the next periodic was particularly concerned that it not providing service to their core review will be informed by the progress artificially limit the size of DTV service communities. Once these digital stations that has occurred on issues such as areas for UHF analog licensees as an are on air, we expect that consumer band-clearing and recovering the artifact of UHF analog service demand for digital sets and signals will spectrum for public safety use and other constraints. In enacting the Community increase and that marketplace forces services. Broadcasters Protection Act of 1999, will act to encourage these stations to 21. Under the approach we are Congress recognized the importance of expand service to their maximized adopting today, stations will be allowed, preserving the right of DTV stations to coverage area. without loss of full service area maximize and established specific protection, to commence digital measures to ensure the protection of 3. DTV STAs operations by constructing and maximized service areas against new 25. Licensees must construct at least operating facilities that at least provide Class A stations. the minimum initial facilities required the required level of digital signal 23. The construction deadlines for to serve their community of license by strength to their communities of license. remaining television licensees are May May 1, 2002 (commercial) or May 1, This will allow stations to focus their 1, 2002 (commercial) and May 1, 2003 2003 (noncommercial). Licensees with energies initially on providing digital (noncommercial), which are also the an existing construction permit for a service to their core communities, while respective construction deadlines for larger facility may elect to commence permitting them later to expand their outstanding construction permits for digital operation with a DTV facility coverage area as the DTV transition maximized facilities granted by the that complies only with these minimum progresses. We believe that this Commission. For the same reasons we initial build-out requirements and is approach more closely reflects the temporarily deferred our regulatory fully subsumed by the permitted marketplace realities, such as DTV replication incentive, we will continue facilities. We will also permit licensees receiver penetration, upon which the to provide DTV interference protection that have not yet been granted a financial decisions of broadcasters and for the time being to the maximized construction permit for allotted or those who offer them financing are service area specified in outstanding maximized DTV facilities to request an based. Because of the large costs of DTV construction permits for facilities STA to commence digital operation. building and operating digital facilities, in excess of those specified in the DTV Licensees choosing to request an STA we recognize that some broadcasters, Table of Allotments. We intend in our should file their request with the and particularly those in smaller next periodic review to establish a date Commission as early as possible and, in markets, may need to take a more by which broadcasters with any event, at least 10 days before they graduated approach to implementing authorizations for maximized digital plan to commence operation. The STA digital service. The requirement that facilities must either provide service to request must specify the technical broadcasters serve their communities of the coverage area specified in their facilities requested, including the
VerDate 11
station’s ERP, HAAT, antenna pattern, if deadlines, in addition to protection to have already constructed facilities that any, geographic coordinates, and tower the allotted facilities. do not meet our increased city-grade registration number, if any. The STA coverage requirement, we believe that, C. City Grade Coverage request must also include a certification given the location of most DTV towers, that the facilities are in compliance with 28. In the Fifth R&O we allowed DTV the cost of making the necessary the FCC’s rules and that the coverage in licensees to build initial facilities that changes to achieve compliance will be any direction does not exceed that placed the required DTV service level minimal in most instances. over their principal community of resulting from the allotted parameters in D. Construction Deadlines Appendix B or in an outstanding license. In turn, the required DTV construction permit. In this regard, we service level was based on the level of 31. Despite the arguments made by a urge licensees to pay special attention to service that they would provide at the number of petitioners, we decline to compliance with FAA and FCC tower edge of their authorized service areas issue a blanket extension of the requirements, the community of license (i.e., at the edge of their NTSC Grade B remaining DTV construction deadlines. coverage requirement, and the FCC’s contours) were they operating with full As noted above, the NAB survey notes environmental rules governing radio allotted DTV power and antenna height. that more than two-thirds of responding frequency (‘‘RF’’) radiation. In the R&O, we imposed a principal commercial stations expect to be on the 26. Once the Commission has granted community coverage requirement that is air in digital format by May 2002. Thus, a DTV STA request, the licensee or stronger than the DTV service contour there is substantial evidence that the requirement that we adopted as an conversion is progressing and that permittee will be authorized to initial obligation in the Fifth R&O. We television stations are working hard to commence digital service as specified in explained that the signal strength construct digital facilities. In view of the the STA. The Commission will make increase would improve the availability number of stations that have already every effort to act on DTV STA requests of service in the city of license and help made a commitment to complying with within 10 days, absent oppositions or prevent the migration of licensees from our deadlines and that have made a unusual circumstances. STAs will be their community of license, thus substantial investment in conversion, granted for a period up to six months. furthering the purposes of section 307(b) we do not believe that a blanket The Commission delegates authority to of the Communications Act. The extension of the remaining deadlines is the Mass Media Bureau to continue to required level of service must be appropriate. Further, given the reduced extend STAs for additional periods not achieved by December 31, 2004 for build-out requirements we adopt herein, to exceed six months each until such commercial stations and December 31, and the clear additional protection we time as the Commission determines 2005 for noncommercial stations. will afford stations meeting these otherwise (for example, by requiring Operating DTV stations must be requirements, we believe that a large that licensees either construct full providing this level of service over their number of the stations that did not replication or maximization facilities or principal communities at that time. anticipate meeting the deadline will relinquish interference protection). 29. We have decided to retain our now be able to do so. One leading Under our rules, STAs are revocable at enhanced principal community signal manufacturer, for instance, states that it will. strength standard. The purpose of our can equip a small market station with 27. Commercial and noncommercial revised requirement is to improve the minimal DTV facilities (500 watts) for stations that are operating pursuant to a availability and reliability of DTV less than $160,000, depending upon the DTV STA by their respective service in the community of license and size of the coverage area or other signal construction deadlines (May 1, 2002 or provide an extra measure of protection propagation characteristics. May 1, 2003) will be considered to have from interference to DTV service in the 32. It is possible, however, that a met this construction deadline, and community. In addition, by requiring a number of stations will not be in a their outstanding construction permits higher level of service over the financial position to provide digital will be extended automatically until community of license, we will limit the service by next May, even with the such time as the Commission extent to which licensees can migrate reduced initial build-out requirements, determines otherwise (for example, by from their current service contour. and will be forced to request an requiring that licensees either construct These goals are consistent with the extension of time to construct. In view full replication or maximization fundamental obligation of licensees to of the limited financial resources of facilities or relinquish interference serve the needs and interests of their many of these stations, we believe that protection). A copy of the STA issued communities of license. it is appropriate at this time to by the FCC must be maintained in the 30. The 7dB increment in DTV service reconsider our standards for granting station’s local public inspection file. contour values that we adopted in the DTV extension requests. Periodically, the staff will issue public R&O was less than what we proposed in 33. In the Fifth R&O, we announced notices identifying the stations the NPRM. We explained that we chose our willingness to grant, on a case-by- authorized to operate on DTV STAs and a lower signal strength increase in order case basis, an extension of the the parameters under which they are or to provide broadcasters with flexibility applicable DTV construction deadline will be operating. Stations operating in locating their transmitters while still where a broadcaster has been unable to pursuant to a DTV STA must comply improving the reliability of service to complete construction due to with the enhanced community coverage the community. While we recognized circumstances that are either requirement by December 2004 that some stations’ currently authorized unforeseeable or beyond the permittee’s (December 2005 for noncommercial DTV facilities might not be able to control, provided the broadcaster has stations). Until the Commission encompass their principal communities taken all reasonable steps to resolve the determines otherwise, we will continue with the increased city-grade signal problem expeditiously. We indicated to provide interference protection to the level, we continue to believe that the that such circumstances include, but are facilities specified in outstanding DTV less burdensome requirement that we not limited to, the inability to construct construction permits issued to adopted will not force many licensees to and place in operation a facility permittees operating pursuant to a DTV increase their power or to move their necessary for transmitting DTV, such as STA as of their applicable construction antenna. Even in cases where licensees a tower, because of delays in obtaining
VerDate 11
zoning or FAA approvals, or similar proprietary and not customarily encourage potential applicants to file constraints, or the lack of equipment disclosed to the public, the applicant quickly for improved facilities, thereby necessary to transmit a DTV signal. We may request that the Commission treat speeding the introduction of improved stated explicitly that we did not the information as confidential. DTV service to the public. anticipate that the circumstances of Applicants must retain underlying 38. We find no reason to reverse our ‘‘lack of equipment’’ would include the documentation fully detailing and decision in this area. Our justification cost of such equipment. However, we supporting their financial for adopting a single cut-off date rather also stated that we would take into representations as well as any steps than to utilize first-come first-serve account problems encountered that are taken to overcome the circumstances processing with respect to the hundreds unique to DTV conversion and would preventing construction. Applicants of pending DTV applications has not modify our existing policies regarding will also be required to indicate when changed. In the R&O, we found that the extensions accordingly. they reasonably expect to complete main advantage of first-come first-serve 34. As indicated by a number of construction. processing—the elimination of mutually petitioners and commenters, we 36. Applicants seeking an extension exclusive (MX) applications—would not recognize that some broadcasters, of time to construct a digital television be achieved in this case, as a large despite their reasonable good faith station must file their extension request number of pending DTV applications efforts, may not be in a financial with the Commission at least sixty days, were filed on certain critical DTV filing position to timely complete the but no more than ninety days, prior to dates. Therefore, even if we were to construction of their DTV facilities. We the applicable construction deadline. have applied first-come first-serve also recognize that, particularly for The Mass Media Bureau will issue a processing, it would not have resulted stations in smaller markets, the capital standard form (FCC Form 337) to be in the elimination of numerous MX costs of conversion may be very high used to apply for an extension of time groups of applications that were filed on relative to the station’s anticipated to construct a DTV station. As under the these dates. While Paxson and Fox both revenue. As a result, stations with lower current standard, the Commission staff maintain that only a few of their revenues may find it more difficult to may grant no more than two extensions applications were filed on these key cover these costs in time to meet the to any permittee, each for a period not dates, this does not change the fact that construction deadline. exceeding six months. We direct the numerous other parties did file 35. For many broadcasters, these Mass Media Bureau to examine closely applications on those dates resulting in financial obstacles will be alleviated by each extension request under the a large number of MX groups. the reduced initial build-out standards we adopt today, and promptly 39. We reject Paxson and Fox’s requirements we have adopted today. to notify applicants of any denial of an argument that adopting a single cut-off We expect that even smaller market extension so that the applicant can date was contrary to customary stations generally should be able to timely complete construction in order to Commission processing procedures. As afford to finance the minimum DTV meet the applicable construction Barry Telecommunications, Inc. notes, facilities required under our rules. Some deadline. Subsequent extension requests the Commission has adopted a variety of broadcasters, however, may be unable to will be referred to the Commission. different processing schemes over the complete construction of even these years, each time determining that the minimum permitted facilities by the E. Mutually Exclusive Applications particular scheme was appropriate for applicable deadline. Accordingly, we 37. In the R&O, we decided to take a the service and circumstances in have determined that we will consider, bifurcated approach to cut-off protection question, including single cut-off date on a case-by-case basis, in addition to for DTV area expansion applications. lists, filing windows and first-come the extension criteria outlined in the With respect to all currently pending first-serve processing. Under the Fifth R&O, whether a broadcaster DTV expansion applications, we circumstances in this case, our approach should be afforded additional time to established cut-off protection as of the to processing pending DTV construct its DTV facilities because the date of the adoption of the R&O (January applications, which balanced the needs cost of meeting the minimum build-out 18, 2001). Thus, all DTV expansion of the licensees, the public and our requirements exceeds the station’s applications pending as of the adoption interest in the orderly administration of financial resources. To qualify under date of the R&O are cut off and spectrum, did not diverge from our prior this standard, the applicant must protected against later-filed DTV practices. provide an itemized estimate of the cost applications. We explained in the R&O 40. As further justification for our of meeting the minimum build-out that this approach would provide a decision, we recognized that there was requirements and a detailed statement measure of fairness to all applicants that an extended period of time over the explaining why its financial condition filed DTV expansion applications prior several months leading to the adoption precludes such an expenditure. We to the adoption of the R&O by allowing of the R&O during which we permitted caution broadcasters that a brief all of them to be considered as part of DTV applications to be filed without downturn in the economy or advertising one cut-off group. As for future DTV indication that applicants needed to revenues will not be considered a expansion applications filed after the expedite their filings or lose out on an sufficient showing of financial hardship. adoption date of the R&O, we opportunity to expand their DTV Rather, the showing must reflect the determined we would consider such allotments. Therefore, we found that particular station’s financial status over applications cut-off as of the close of first-come first-serve processing would an economically significant period of business on the day they are filed. We unfairly prejudice those licensees, time. In addition, the applicant must concluded that day-to-day cut-off particularly smaller market and detail its good faith efforts to meet the processing for new DTV expansion noncommercial educational licensees, deadline, including its good faith efforts applications would help to avoid a that, as permitted, waited until their to obtain the requisite financing, and larger number of mutually exclusive later deadlines to file their DTV explain why those efforts were (‘‘MX’’) applications and thus expedite applications. Contrary to the arguments unsuccessful. To the extent that the processing of these applications and the raised by Paxson and Fox, we continue applicant’s description of its financial provision of DTV service to the public. to find that the equities favor processing condition sets forth information that is Day-to-day cut-off procedures also of the hundreds of DTV applications,
VerDate 11
including expansion applications, which were filed after June 30, 1997) to Furthermore, midstream changes to the which were timely filed in reliance on be mutually exclusive with NTSC analysis process raise issues of fair and the Commission’s processing system. application groups on file prior to July consistent treatment of applicants and Barry notes that the Commission’s DTV 1, 1997, regardless of whether these stations. It may be appropriate to processing system included publication groups involve locations inside or consider a new approach at the time of deadlines for the filing of DTV outside the freeze areas or whether or that protection of the Appendix B applications that would be considered not the groups have been settled. This allotment ends. As decided elsewhere in on an equal footing with prior filings. is the case also where there is an NTSC this document, we are not currently Noncommercial educational licensees application that was cut-off as part of a establishing a date to end protection of like Barry have invested substantial group of NTSC applications filed before that ‘‘replication’’ facility. resources in their proposals and we July 1, 1997, but that is now a singleton 45. Fox also seeks clarification agree that Paxson’s and Fox’s proposals because the other applications in the concerning the DTV interference are no more entitled to priority group have been dismissed. NTSC analysis for determining that other DTV consideration than these later-filed applications in these two categories stations are protected. Fox urges the applications. As Barry points out, the shall be protected against DTV Commission to ‘‘only protect the Commission never provided any maximization applications. We believe stronger of either the allotted facilities applicant assurance of protection these revisions to the procedure address or the currently authorized facilities.’’ beyond that which was provided in the the concerns of KM and ALF. DTV Fox contends that protecting both makes DTV Table of Allotments. Any applicant maximization applicants will be the computation of protection that is trying to maximize its allocation permitted to file minor amendments to unnecessarily complex by requiring was never guaranteed success on that resolve conflicts with NTSC analysis of all possible combinations of filing and has no claim to favorable applications in these categories. In station facilities. action based simply on the timing of its addition, our decision today does not 46. As Fox requests, we clarify that application. Having considered and affect the ability of those DTV protection need not be determined for rejected the arguments of the broadcasters whose maximization authorized DTV facilities that are petitioners, we affirm our application of applications may interfere with NTSC smaller than, and encompassed by, the a single cut-off date to the DTV applications in these categories from corresponding DTV allotment facilities. applications pending on January 18, applying to maximize at the close of the Specifically, applicants need not 2001. transition on their analog allotment. determine that protection is provided to 41. In the R&O, we gave priority to other DTV station applications or pending DTV expansion applications F. Technical Issues authorizations that meet the technical over all NTSC applications except NTSC 43. We have adopted a 2 percent de criteria for ‘‘checklist’’ processing. The applications that fell into one of three minimis interference standard for technical ‘‘checklist’’ criteria are: (1) special categories—post-auction changes to DTV stations and allotments. proposed transmitter site within 5.0 applications, applications proposed for In his petition for reconsideration, kilometers of underlying DTV allotment grant in pending settlements, and any Donald G. Everist (Everist) seeks reference coordinates, (2) proposed singleton applications cut-off from clarification regarding the analysis the antenna HAAT not exceeding further filings. These applications must Commission uses for determining underlying DTV allotment HAAT by have been accepted for filing in order to whether the amount of interference more than 10 meters, and (3) proposed be protected from DTV expansion caused by a DTV application to another ERP in every azimuthal direction not applications. We stated that, in the DTV station is de minimis. Specifically, exceeding underlying DTV allotment future, when an applicant files a DTV Everist is concerned with protection to ERP for that direction, (with a small ERP expansion application, it must a DTV station that has been authorized adjustment if the proposed HAAT determine whether there are NTSC facilities that cover more people than differs from the DTV allotment HAAT). applications on file in any of the three the station’s underlying DTV allotment In general, a ‘‘checklist’’ application categories and provide interference (the Appendix B population) (DTV will produce a DTV service area that is protection to them. As for pending DTV Table of Allotments, Second contained within the replication service expansion applications, when one Memorandum Opinion and Order on area of the underlying DTV allotment. In conflicts with an NTSC application in Reconsideration of the Fifth and Sixth addition to ‘‘checklist’’ applications and one of these categories, we stated that Report and Orders, 64 FR 4322, January authorizations, there are applications we would treat the applications as 28, 1999, at Appendix B). Everist notes and resulting DTV authorizations that mutually exclusive (‘‘MX’’) and follow that predicted interference is to be are considered ‘‘checklist-like.’’ These the procedures adopted in the R&O for determined to any people in the applications and authorizations do not MX applications—that is, we will station’s increased service area but meet one or more of the technical require that the parties resolve their MX indicates that the current Commission ‘‘checklist’’ criteria, but produce a DTV within 90 days or we will subsequently analysis seems to compare that service area that is contained with the dismiss both applications. interference population with the smaller replication service area of the 42. We revise the procedures Appendix B population to determine if underlying DTV allotment. As with announced in the R&O in the following the interference exceeds the 2% de ‘‘checklist’’ applications and respects. First, we note that, by minimis standard. authorizations, ‘‘checklist-like’’ application of section 309(l) of the 44. We clarify that the analysis applications and authorization need not Communications Act, pending NTSC comparison in this situation is to the be protected by applications from other application groups on file prior to July station’s Appendix B population, as DTV stations. Protection of the 1, 1997, are entitled to compete in an Everist surmised. To the extent he is underlying DTV allotment is required. auction that does not include implying that the analysis should be 47. We note that the Fox request also applications filed on or after July 1, changed, such a suggestion is beyond could be interpreted to request a more 1997. Therefore, pursuant to that the scope of this reconsideration. The extensive limitation on the DTV statutory directive, we may not find analysis was not adopted, altered, or facilities that must be protected, and we DTV expansion applications (all of even explained in the R&O. do not find such a limitation warranted.
VerDate 11
For example, a DTV station might have 365 meters (m) or less (365 m is MO&O have been analyzed with respect authorized facilities that are neither approximately 1200 feet). For antennas to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ‘‘checklist’’ nor ‘‘checklist-like,’’ where located at higher HAATs, the standard (‘‘Act’’) and found to impose new or such authorization extends the maximum ERP is reduced, with the modified reporting and recordkeeping underlying DTV allotment service standard maximum UHF DTV ERP requirements or burdens on the public. contour in some directions and being 750 kW at an HAAT of 425 m and Implementation of these new or contracts the service contour in other 316 kW at 610 m. We also clarify that modified reporting and recordkeeping directions. Under such a circumstance, the largest station provision is applied requirements will be subject to approval the authorized contour would not be when a DTV application requests an by the Office of Management and entirely contained within the allotment ERP greater than the rule allows for its Budget (‘‘OMB’’) as prescribed by the contour and conversely, the allotment requested HAAT on its channel. Thus it Act. contour would not be entirely contained is the standard maximum ERP of the within the authorized contour. One DTV station proposing to maximize that 54. Comments. As part of our interpretation of the Fox request would triggers applicability of the ‘‘largest continuing effort to reduce paperwork be to only protect the authorized service station’’ provision. burdens, we invite the general public to if it reaches more people or area than take this opportunity to comment on the G. DTV Translators and Repeaters the allotment. Similarly, that information collections contained in interpretation would only protect the 50. As we stated in the R&O, while we this MO&O, as required by the allotment service if it reaches more recognize the desire to initiate DTV Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996. people or area than the authorized operations on translator and booster Public and agency comments are due facility. For two reasons, we are not facilities, we believe there are February 19, 2002. Comments should accepting this more limited protection fundamental issues surrounding their address: (a) whether the proposed calculation. First, it is inconsistent with authorization and protection that must collection of information is necessary be addressed in a more comprehensive our decision in the replication section of for the proper performance of the manner than can be accomplished based the R&O. There we decide to continue functions of the Commission, including to protect DTV allotment service. The on the limited record on this issue in whether the information shall have Fox proposal would only continue that this proceeding. Accordingly, we will practical utility; (b) ways to enhance the allotment protection if that service area defer consideration of these issues to a or population is larger than the separate rulemaking proceeding on quality, utility, and clarity of the authorized (or applied for) service. digital LPTV, translator and booster information collected; and (c) ways to Second, where a DTV authorization stations. We hope to initiate this minimize the burden of the collection of allows a service area to be shifted from proceeding in the near future. information on the respondents, the DTV allotment service area, we do including the use of automated IV. Conclusion not believe it is fair or appropriate to collection techniques or other forms of deny protection to that authorized 51. In this MO&O, we revise a number information technology. In addition to service area if it reaches fewer people or of the determinations we made in the filing comments with the Secretary, a less overall area than the allotment R&O to ensure continued progress in the copy of any comments on the facility would reach. transition to digital broadcasting. By information collections contained 48. We have established tables and temporarily deferring the channel herein should be submitted to Judy formulas for determining maximum election and replication deadlines Boley, Federal Communications effective radiated power (ERP) limits for established in the R&O, and by Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, S.W., various antenna heights, channels and extending interference protection to Room C–1804, Washington, D.C. 20554, zones. In the R&O, we clarified our maximized service areas, our intention or via the Internet to [email protected] and process for applying an alternative is to prioritize those elements that are to Edward Springer, OMB Desk Officer, determination of a DTV station’s most important to the DTV transition. 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, N.W., maximum ERP based on matching the Our primary goal is to maximize the Washington, D.C. 20503 or via the coverage area of the largest station in the number of DTV stations on the air and market. We indicated that the provision provide service to most, if not all, Internet to is triggered only where a station in a consumers. We believe that our actions [email protected]. market is covering a larger area than today will help further the transition Supplemental Final Regulatory could be covered with standard and promote the goal of replication by Flexibility Analysis maximum power and antenna height. increasing the number of DTV stations KM seeks additional clarification on the air and the number of DTV 55. As required by the Regulatory regarding the reference to standard receivers in the hands of consumers. Flexibility Act (RFA), an Initial maximum power and antenna height, Once set penetration rates increase, we Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) asking if it refers to the largest station believe that marketplace forces will was incorporated in the Notice of in the market or to the DTV station provide further incentives that will Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) and a proposing to maximize. KM also asks if result in the expansion of DTV service Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis the standard refers to the DTV Table of in the future. (FRFA) was incorporated in the R&O. Allotment parameters, or some other V. Administrative Matters The Commission sought written public parameters that may be permitted under comment on the proposals in the NPRM, the Commission’s rules. 52. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. including comment on the IRFA. No 49. We clarify that the standard Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility comments were received in response to maximum facilities are the power and Act of 1980, as amended, the antenna height limits specified in Commission’s Supplemental Final the IRFA or the FRFA. The present § 73.622(f)(6)–(8) of our Rules. For Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been Supplemental Final Regulatory example, for UHF DTV stations, the completed and attached. Flexibility Analysis (‘‘Supplemental standard maximum ERP is 1000 53. Paperwork Reduction Act FRFA’’) conforms to the RFA. kilowatts (kW) if the antenna HAAT is Analysis. The actions taken in this
VerDate 11
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the channel election and replication in the R&O, this new city-grade service Memorandum Opinion and Order on protection deadlines on broadcasters, requirement will become effective Reconsideration and particularly broadcasters in smaller December 31, 2004 for commercial 56. In January 2001, we released an television markets. Generally, smaller stations and December 31, 2005 for R&O and Further Notice of Proposed market broadcasters assert that they will noncommercial stations. The majority of Rule Making in MM Docket 00–39 (66 not be able to obtain the financing to petitioners that addressed this issue did FR 9973, February 13, 2001) (R&O), construct DTV facilities sufficient to not object to the Commission’s addressing a number of issues related to replicate their analog service area, and increased city grade signal requirement the conversion of the nation’s broadcast that they will not have sufficient as long as it was implemented in operational experience by December conjunction with a waiver policy that television system from analog to digital 2004 (the channel election deadline for affords broadcasters flexibility in certain television (DTV). Among the issues commercial stations) to determine circumstances. Some commenters addressed in the R&O were: when to which core channel is superior for DTV pointed out that broadcasters face many require election by licensees of their transmission. different configurations of terrain and post-transition DTV channel; whether to 59. In this MO&O, we respond to geography, not all of which lend require replication by DTV licensees of these concerns by allowing stations to themselves to siting towers that both their NTSC Grade B service contours construct more minimal initial DTV provide the widest possible service and (thereby providing coverage to those facilities designed to serve their cast a stronger signal over the principal who receive the station’s analog signal); communities of license while still community. Other commenters noted whether to require DTV licensees to retaining, for the time being, DTV that some broadcasters have already place enhanced service contours over interference protection to the full built DTV facilities that may have to be their principal communities (thereby replication facility. We also temporarily moved or expensively reconfigured to serving these communities with a defer the deadline by which meet the new principal community stronger signal); and how we should broadcasters with two in-core coverage requirement. process mutually exclusive allotments (television channels 2–52) 61. The purpose of the stronger city- applications. We expressed our belief must elect which channel they will grade signal strength requirement is to that resolution of these issues would eventually use for DTV at the end of the improve the availability and reliability provide licensees with a measure of transition. In our next periodic review of DTV service in the community of certainty that would help them plan of the progress of the DTV transition, license and provide an extra measure of facilities, order equipment, and arrange the Commission intends to establish a protection from interference to DTV for construction of facilities, all of firm date by which broadcasters must service in the community. In addition, which will speed the transition to either replicate their NTSC service areas by requiring a higher level of service digital service. or lose DTV service protection of the over the community of license, we will 57. We received a number of petitions unreplicated areas, and by which limit the extent to which licensees can for reconsideration of the R&O. In this broadcasters with two in-core migrate from their current service Memorandum Opinion and Order on allotments must elect which channel contour. These goals are consistent with Reconsideration (MO&O), we revise a they will use post-transition. These the fundamental obligation of licensees number of the determinations we made replication protection and channel to serve the needs and interests of their in the R&O, affirm other decisions, and election deadlines may be earlier than communities of license. The 7dB provide clarification of certain rules and but will in no event be later than the increment in DTV service contour policies. We also modify, on our own latest of either the end of 2006 or the values that we adopted in the R&O was motion, the minimum hours of date by which 85% of the television less than what we proposed in the operation of certain DTV stations and households in a licensee’s market are NPRM. We explained that we chose a establish guidelines for television capable of receiving the signals of lower signal strength increase in order stations that may seek an extension of digital broadcast stations. In addition, to provide broadcasters with flexibility our May 1, 2002 and May 1, 2003 we also allow DTV stations required to in locating their transmitters while still deadlines for construction of DTV complete construction of DTV facilities improving the reliability of service to facilities. We will resolve several major by May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003 to the community. While we recognized technical issues raised in the R&O and operate initially at a reduced schedule that some stations’ currently authorized Further Notice of Proposed Rule by providing, at a minimum, a digital DTV facilities might not be able to Making, including the issues of receiver signal during prime time hours, encompass their principal communities performance standards, DTV tuners, consistent with their simulcast with the increased city-grade signal revisions to certain components of the obligations. In order to provide parity to level, we continue to believe that the DTV transmission standard, and analog UHF stations, we will also allow less burdensome requirement that we labeling requirements for television stations to construct initial DTV adopted will not force many licensees to receivers, in a separate Report and facilities that serve their principal increase their power or to move their Order. communities while retaining DTV antenna. Even in cases where licensees interference protection to their have already constructed facilities that B. Summary of Significant Issues Raised maximized service areas for the time do not meet our increased city-grade by Public Comments being, subject to the interference coverage requirement, we believe that, 58. No comments were received in protection deadline we intend to given the location of most DTV towers, response to the IRFA, and no petitions establish in the next periodic review. the cost of making the necessary or comments were received in response 60. We do not alter, however, our changes to achieve compliance will be to the FRFA contained in the R&O. decision to require stations to provide a minimal in most instances. However, a number of parties that filed stronger DTV signal to their 62. We also received comments and petitions for reconsideration or communities of license than that petitions requesting an extension of the comments in response to the R&O and adopted as an initial requirement in the remaining deadlines (May 1, 2002 Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making Fifth R&O in MM Docket 87–268 63 FR commercial and May 1, 2003 raised concerns about the impact of the 135461, May 29, 1998). As established noncommercial) to complete
VerDate 11
construction of DTV facilities. broadcasting stations with $10.5 million determined that, after December 31, Generally, these parties argue that or less in annual receipts. 2004, whatever portion of a commercial stations in smaller markets need 66. The digital television rules we broadcaster’s NTSC Grade B contour is additional time to plan and construct address in the MO&O apply to not replicated with its digital television their DTV facilities given the expense commercial and noncommercial signal will cease to be protected in the involved in conversion and the lower television stations. There are DTV Table of Allotments. level of profitability of these stations. approximately 1,304 existing Noncommercial DTV licensees were Petitioners also argue that it is commercial television stations and 374 given until December 31, 2005 in which unreasonable to expect small market existing noncommercial television to replicate or lose such DTV broadcasters to commence digital stations of all sizes that may be affected interference protection. service in the midst of the uncertain by the digital television rules addressed 70. Upon further consideration, we market conditions created by, among in the MO&O. determine in the MO&O that the channel election and replication other things, the issues surrounding the D. Description of Projected Reporting, requirements may be imposing DTV transmission standard and the low Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance substantial burdens on broadcasters, rate of DTV receiver penetration. In Requirements addition, parties claim that many and especially on smaller stations, stations have yet to receive their DTV 67. The MO&O directs the FCC’s Mass without sufficient countervailing public permits with only a few months left Media Bureau to issue a standard form benefits, and may in fact be contributing before the construction deadline, which (FCC Form 337) to be used to apply for to difficulties faced by a substantial has made it difficult for broadcasters to an extension of time to construct a DTV number of stations, particularly smaller schedule highly-demanded tower station. We estimate that it will take stations, in meeting their DTV applicants 1 hour and 30 minutes to construction crews and to coordinate construction deadlines. A survey complete the form. the purchase of costly equipment. conducted by NAB indicates that Several petitioners support extending E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant slightly less than one-third of all the construction deadline to May 1, Impact on Small Entities, and stations responding to the NAB survey 2003 (the same deadline as Significant Alternatives Considered anticipate that they will not be able to noncommercial educational stations) for provide a digital signal by the May 2002 68. The RFA requires an agency to deadline. A larger percentage (81.9%) of stations in markets 50–100, and to May describe any significant alternatives that 1, 2004 for stations in markets above responding stations in the top 50 it has considered in reaching its markets (larger market stations) 100. Others propose tying build-out proposed approach, which may include requirements to a market-defined anticipate that they will meet the the following four alternatives (among deadline, while a smaller percentage milepost, such as DTV receiver others): (1) The establishment of penetration levels. (49.1%) of stations in markets 100 and differing compliance or reporting above (smaller-market stations) 63. In response to these views, we requirements or timetables that take into indicated they will complete modify in the MO&O our guidelines for account the resources available to small construction on time. Three-quarters of television stations that may seek an entities; (2) the clarification, those stations that do not anticipate extension of our May 1, 2002 and May consolidation, or simplification of meeting the May 2002 deadline 1, 2003 deadlines for construction of compliance reporting requirements indicated they plan to seek an extension DTV facilities, making extensions under the rule for small entities; (3) the of this deadline from the FCC. available to broadcasters that can use of performance, rather than design Generally, smaller market broadcasters demonstrate that the cost of meeting the standards; and (4) an exemption from that filed petitions in this proceeding minimum build-out requirements coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, assert that they are unable to obtain exceeds the station’s financial resources. for small entities. financing to construct DTV facilities C. Description and Estimate of the 69. We made a number of sufficient to replicate their analog Number of Small Entities to Which the determinations in the R&O that we service area. These broadcasters also Proposed Rules Apply believed would further progress on the claim that they will not have sufficient transition from analog to digital operational experience by December 64. The RFA directs agencies to television. Among other things, we 2004 to determine which core channel provide a description of and, where established a deadline of December 31, is superior for DTV transmission. feasible, an estimate of the number of 2003 by which commercial television Broadcasters that are not capable of small entities that may be affected by stations that have both their NTSC and constructing full replication facilities by the rules. The RFA generally defines the DTV operations on in-core channels the deadline established in the R&O term ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same must elect which of their two core may be postponing construction meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’ channels to use for DTV operations after altogether. ‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small the transition. We gave non-commercial 71. Upon reconsideration, we decide governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition, stations that have both their NTSC and in the MO&O to allow stations to the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same DTV operations on in-core channels construct initial DTV facilities designed meaning as the term ‘‘small business until the end of 2004 to elect their post- to serve at least their communities of concern’’ under the Small Business Act. transition DTV channel. We determined license, while still retaining DTV A small business concern is one that: (1) that this early channel election would interference protection to provide full Is independently owned and operated; allow us to identify more quickly replication until such deadline as the (2) is not dominant in its field of channels that will be available to Commission shall establish in its next operation; and (3) satisfies any accommodate DTV licensees with out- periodic review of the progress of the additional criteria established by the of-core transition channels as well as DTV transition. Thus, we temporarily Small Business Administration (SBA). new entrants. In addition, to provide defer both the replication protection and 65. Small TV Broadcast Stations. The broadcasters with an incentive to channel election deadlines we SBA defines small television provide full replication of NTSC established in the R&O. In our next broadcasting stations as television coverage with DTV service, we periodic review of the progress of the
VerDate 11
DTV transition, the Commission intends reduce the burden on these broadcasters facilities because the cost of meeting the to establish a firm date by which where possible with our goal of minimum build-out requirements broadcasters must either replicate their furthering progress in the transition to exceeds the station’s financial resources. NTSC service areas or lose DTV service digital broadcasting. This new waiver standard should be protection of the unreplicated areas, and 74. In addition, in the MO&O we particularly beneficial to smaller market by which broadcasters with two in-core modify our guidelines for television broadcasters and those with fewer allotments must elect which channel stations that may seek an extension of resources. they will use post-transition. These the DTV construction deadlines. In the 77. This relaxation of our extension replication protection and channel Fifth R&O, we announced our standard will benefit small entities by election deadlines may be earlier than willingness to grant, on a case-by-case giving additional leeway to stations in but will in no event be later than the basis, an extension of the applicable smaller markets that need more time to latest of either the end of 2006 or the DTV construction deadline where a construct because of their lower date by which 85% of the television broadcaster has been unable to complete revenues. By permitting these stations to households in a licensee’s market are construction due to circumstances that delay the transition for a brief period of capable of receiving the signals of are either unforeseeable or beyond the time, they will be able to spread the digital broadcast stations. In order to permittee’s control, provided the large investments needed to convert provide parity to analog UHF stations, broadcaster has taken all reasonable over more years. By delaying the many of which are smaller stations, we steps to resolve the problem transition for a short period for those will also allow stations to construct expeditiously. We indicated that such stations that face the greatest financial initial facilities that serve their principal circumstances include, but are not challenges, these stations may also communities while retaining DTV limited to, the inability to construct and benefit from further progress overall in interference protection to their place in operation a facility necessary the transition, including greater maximized service areas until the for transmitting DTV, such as a tower, consumer demand for digital television maximization deadline to be established because of delays in obtaining zoning or signals and greater advertising revenue. by the Commission in its next periodic FAA approvals, or similar constraints, 78. We considered but declined in the review. This alternative significantly or the lack of equipment necessary to MO&O to issue a blanket extension of reduces the costs associated with transmit a DTV signal. We stated the remaining DTV construction constructing and operating initial DTV explicitly that we did not anticipate that deadlines. It appears that more than facilities as compared to the the circumstances of ‘‘lack of two-thirds of commercial stations will requirements adopted in the R&O. equipment’’ would include the cost of be on the air in digital format by May 72. In contrast, the Commission could such equipment. 2002. Thus, there is substantial have retained its channel election and 75. As indicated by a number of evidence that the conversion is replication protection deadlines petitioners and commenters, we progressing and that television stations established in the R&O. However, we recognize that some broadcasters, are working hard to construct digital have determined that those deadlines despite their reasonable good faith facilities. In view of the number of may be too burdensome, and that the efforts, may not be in a financial stations that have already made a Commission should reexamine what position to timely complete the commitment to complying with our deadlines are appropriate in its next construction of their DTV facilities. deadlines and that have made a periodic review in light of the record Many stations are finding it difficult to substantial investment in conversion, developed in the interim regarding the obtain the substantial sums required to we do not believe that a blanket progress of the DTV transition. The construct digital television facilities. extension of the remaining deadlines is alternative selected herein works to Many stations are also experiencing appropriate. Further, given the reduced benefit smaller stations by facilitating decreasing revenues in part as a result build-out requirements we adopt herein, their compliance with the May 1, 2002 of the slowdown in the overall and the clear additional protection we (commercial) and May 1, 2003 economy, which has slowed even will afford stations, including smaller (noncommercial) construction further in the wake of the events of stations, meeting these requirements, we deadlines. September 11, 2001. We also recognize believe that many of the stations that 73. The MO&O also allows stations that, particularly for stations in smaller did not anticipate meeting the deadline required to construct and operate DTV markets, the capital costs of conversion will now be able and willing to do so. facilities by May 1, 2002 or May 1, 2003 may be very high relative to the station’s to operate initially in digital format at a anticipated revenue. As a result, stations Report to Congress reduced schedule by providing, at a with lower revenues may find it more 79. The Commission will send a copy minimum, a digital signal during prime difficult to cover these costs in time to of the MO&O, including this time hours, consistent with their meet the construction deadline. Supplemental FRFA, in a report to be simulcast obligations. This alternative 76. For some broadcasters, these sent to Congress pursuant to the also significantly reduces the costs financial obstacles may be alleviated by Congressional Review Act. In addition, associated with initial operation of DTV the reduced initial build-out the Commission will send a copy of the facilities for these smaller stations. In requirements adopted in the MO&O. MO&O, including the Supplemental contrast, the Commission could have Other broadcasters, however, may be FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for retained the requirement for these unable, for purely financial reasons, to Advocacy of the SBA. A copy of the stations that they operate in digital complete construction of even these MO&O and Supplemental FRFA (or format whenever they transmit in analog minimum permitted facilities by the summaries thereof) will also be format, greatly increasing their costs. May 1, 2002 deadline. Accordingly, in published in the Federal Register. Although the Commission considered the MO&O we determine that we will reducing the minimum operating hours consider, on a case-by-case basis, in VI. Ordering Clauses for all digital stations, we believe that addition to the extension criteria 80. Pursuant to authority contained in the prime time obligation adopted in the outlined in the Fifth R&O, whether a sections 1, 4(i), 303, and 336(f) of the MO&O for smaller stations broadcaster should be afforded Communications Act of 1934, as appropriately balances our concern to additional time to construct its DTV amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 303,
VerDate 11
and 336(f), Part 73 of the Commission’s (C) By all rulemaking petitions to construction permit filed after January rules, 47 CFR Part 73, ARE AMENDED amend the NTSC TV table of allotments; 18, 2001: as set forth in the Rule Changes below. (D) By DTV applications filed after (i) Shall be afforded the interference 81. The amendments set forth in the January 18, 2001; and protection set forth in paragraph (c) or Rule Changes SHALL BE EFFECTIVE (E) By rulemaking petitions to amend (d) of this section, as applicable: February 19, 2002. FCC Form 337 the DTV table of allotments filed after (A) By all NTSC minor change contains information collection January 18, 2001; applications; requirements that have not been (ii) Must demonstrate the requisite (B) By NTSC new station applications, approved by OMB. Public and agency interference protection set forth in except those covered by paragraph comments on these information paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, as (h)(2)(ii)(H) and (I) of this section; collections are due February 19, 2002. applicable, to: (C) By all rulemaking petitions to The FCC will publish a document (A) DTV licensed stations; amend the NTSC TV table of allotments announcing the effective date of FCC (B) DTV construction permits; except those filed by NTSC applicants Form 337 once OMB approval is (C) Existing DTV allotments; in those groups defined in (h)(2)(ii)(I) of (D) Rulemaking petitions to amend received. this section for which a Notice of the DTV table of allotments for which a 82. The petitions for reconsideration Proposed Rule Making has been Notice of Proposed Rule Making has or clarification received in response to released and the comment deadline been released and the comment the R&O Are Granted to the extent specified therein has passed prior to the deadline specified therein has passed provided herein and otherwise Are filing date of the DTV application; prior to the filing date of the DTV Denied. (D) By later-filed DTV applications; 83. The Commission’s Consumer application; (E) NTSC stations with licenses and Information Bureau, Reference (E) By later-filed rulemaking petitions covering construction permits that were Information Center, Shall Send a copy to amend the DTV table of allotments; granted before the DTV application was of this MO&O, including the (ii) Must demonstrate the requisite filed; Supplemental Final Regulatory (F) NTSC construction permits that interference protection set forth in Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief were granted before the DTV application paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, as Counsel for Advocacy of the Small was filed; applicable, to: Business Administration. (G) Applications for new NTSC (A) DTV licensed stations; 84. This proceeding Is Terminated. television stations that were in groups of (B) DTV construction permits; (C) Earlier-filed DTV applications; List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 mutually exclusive applications on file prior to July 1, 1997, regardless of (D) Existing DTV allotments; Television, broadcasting. (E) Rulemaking petitions to amend the whether they are the only applications DTV table of allotments for which a Federal Communications Commission. that remain pending from their group. Magalie Roman Salas, (iii) That do not provide the requisite Notice of Proposed Rule Making has Secretary. interference protection set forth in been released and the comment paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, as deadline specified therein has passed Rule Changes applicable, to the following applications prior to the filing date of the DTV For the reasons discussed in the and petitions will be deemed mutually application; preamble, the Federal Communications exclusive with those applications and (F) NTSC stations with licenses Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as petitions: covering construction permits that were follows: (A) Other DTV applications pending granted before the DTV application was as of January 18, 2001; filed; PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST (B) Rulemaking petitions to amend (G) NTSC construction permits that SERVICES the DTV table of allotments filed on or were granted before the DTV application before January 18, 2001 for which a was filed; and 1. The authority citation for part 73 Notice of Proposed Rule Making had (H) Earlier-filed and accepted for continues to read as follows: been released and the comment filing applications for new NTSC Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, and deadline specified therein had not stations that are not covered by 336. passed prior to the filing date of the paragraph (h)(2)(ii)(I) of this section, and that: 2. Section 73.623 is amended by DTV application; (1) Were filed by post-auction winners revising paragraph (h) to read as (C) Rulemaking petitions to amend pursuant to § 73.5005. follows: the DTV table of allotments filed on or before January 18, 2001 for which a (2) Are part of a settlement agreement § 73.623 DTV applications and changes to Notice of Proposed Rule Making had not on-file with the Commission that would DTV allotments. been released; and result in the grant of the NTSC * * * * * (D) Applications for new NTSC application; or (h) DTV Application Processing. (1) stations that are not covered by (3) Are cut-off singletons; DTV applications for a construction paragraph (h)(1)(ii)(G) of this section (I) Applications for new NTSC permit or a modified construction and were filed and accepted for filing on television stations that were in groups of permit pending as of January 18, 2001: or before January 18, 2001 that: mutually exclusive applications on file (i) Shall be afforded the interference (1) Were filed by post-auction winners prior to July 1, 1997, regardless of protection set forth in paragraph (c) or pursuant to § 73.5005. whether they are the only applications (d) of this section, as applicable: (2) Are part of a settlement agreement that remain pending from their group; (A) By all NTSC minor change on-file with the Commission that would (J) Rulemaking petitions to amend the applications; result in the grant of the NTSC NTSC table of allotments filed by (B) By NTSC new station applications, application; or applicants defined in (h)(2)(ii)(I) of this except those covered by paragraphs (3) Are cut-off singletons. section for which a Notice of Proposed (h)(1)(ii)(G) and (h)(1)(iii)(D) of this (2) DTV applications for a Rule Making has been released and the section; construction permit or a modified comment deadline specified therein has
VerDate 11
passed prior to the filing of the DTV spectrum to the Commission, and zoning or FAA approvals, or similar application. except as provided in paragraph (i ) of constraints; (iii) That do not provide the requisite this section; at any time that a DTV (B) the lack of equipment necessary to interference protection set forth in broadcast station permittee or licensee obtain a digital television signal; or paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, as transmits a video program signal on its (C) where the cost of meeting the applicable, to the following applications analog television channel, it must also minimum build-out requirements and petitions will be deemed mutually transmit at least one over-the-air video exceeds the station’s financial resources. exclusive with those applications and program signal on the DTV channel. In * * * * * petitions: addition, the DTV broadcast station (iv) Applications for extension of time (A) Other DTV applications filed the permittee or licensee is subject to the shall be filed no earlier than 90 and no same day; simulcasting requirements in paragraph later than 60 days prior to the relevant (B) Rulemaking petitions to amend (f) of this section. The DTV service that the DTV table of allotments for which a construction deadline, absent a showing is provided pursuant to this paragraph of sufficient reasons for filing within Notice of Proposed Rule Making had must be at least comparable in been released and the comment less than 60 days of the relevant resolution to the analog television construction deadline. deadline specified therein had not station programming transmitted to passed prior to the filing date of the viewers on the analog channel. * * * * * DTV application; and (1) DTV broadcast station permittees 4. Section 73.625 is amended by (C) Earlier-filed rulemaking petitions or licensees required to construct and revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as to amend the DTV table of allotments operate a DTV station by May 1, 2002 follows: for which a Notice of Proposed Rule or May 1, 2003 pursuant to paragraph Making had not been released. § 73.625 DTV coverage of principal (d) of this section must, at a minimum, (3) DTV applicants, DTV applicants community and antenna system. beginning on the date on which the DTV and NTSC applicants, or DTV (a) * * * station is required to be constructed, applicants and DTV rulemaking (1) The DTV transmitter location shall provide a digital video program signal, petitioners that are mutually exclusive be chosen so that, on the basis of the of the quality described in paragraph (b) pursuant to this section will be notified effective radiated power and antenna above, during prime time hours as by Public Notice and provided with a height above average terrain employed, defined in § 79.3(a)(6) of this chapter. 90-day period of time to resolve their the following minimum F(50,90) field These licensees and permittees must mutual exclusivity via engineering strength in dB above one uV/m will be also comply with the simulcasting amendment or settlement. Those provided over the entire principal requirements in paragraph (f) of this applications and petitions that remain community to be served: section. mutually exclusive upon conclusion of Channels 2–6 ...... 35 dBu the 90-day settlement period will be (2) DTV licensees or permittees that Channels 7–13 ...... 43 dBu dismissed. choose to commence digital operation Channels 14–69 ...... 48 dBu 3. Section 73.624 is amended by before the construction deadline set revising paragraphs (b), (d)(3)(ii), and forth in paragraph (d) of this section are Note to paragraph (a)(1): These (d)(3)(iv) to read as follows: not subject to any minimum schedule requirements above do not become effective for operation on the DTV channel. until December 31, 2004 for commercial § 73.624 Digital television broadcast * * * * * television licensees and December 31, 2005 stations. for noncommercial television licensees. Prior (d) * * * * * * * * to those dates, the following minimum (b) DTV broadcast station permittees (3) * * * F(50,90) field strength in dB above one uV/ or licensees must transmit at least one (ii) Such circumstances shall include, m must be provided over the entire principal community to be served: over-the-air video program signal at no but shall not be limited to: direct charge to viewers on the DTV (A) Inability to construct and place in Channels 2–6 ...... 28 dBu channel. Until such time as a DTV operation a facility necessary for Channels 7–13 ...... 36 dBu station permittee or licensee ceases transmitting digital television, such as a Channels 14–69 ...... 41 dBu analog transmissions and returns that tower, because of delays in obtaining BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate 11
Appendix—Form 337
Note: This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
VerDate 11
[FR Doc. 01–30433 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
VerDate 11
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 243
Tuesday, December 18, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC issued an October 18, 2000, contains notices to the public of the proposed letter to UCS, ‘‘Director’s Decision Background issuance of rules and regulations. The Under 10 CFR 2.206.’’ The Director’s purpose of these notices is to give interested By letter dated May 3, 2000, UCS Decision disagreed with the petitioner’s persons an opportunity to participate in the submitted a petition for rulemaking contentions and concluded that the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. (PRM) seeking to revise 10 CFR parts 54 Hatch Nuclear Plant was being operated and 51. The petitioner requested that consistent with its design and licensing the NRC regulations governing bases because the material condition of NUCLEAR REGULATORY requirements for renewal of operating piping, tanks, and other components of COMMISSION licenses for nuclear power plants be the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste amended to address concerns about management systems was being 10 CFR Part 54 potential aging degradation of liquid properly inspected and maintained. and gaseous radioactive waste systems. [Docket No. PRM 54–1] The petitioner believes the degradation The Petition Union of Concerned Scientists; Denial from aging of piping and components of UCS requests the NRC revise 10 CFR of Petition for Rulemaking liquid and gaseous radioactive waste part 54, and part 51 if appropriate, to systems at nuclear power facilities may specify that the liquid and gaseous AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory result in increased probability of and/or radioactive waste management systems Commission. consequences from design and licensing must be covered by aging management ACTION: Denial of petition for bases events. In addition, the petitioner programs during the license renewal rulemaking. believes that the conclusions made in term. With respect to 10 CFR part 54, Appendix B to 10 CFR part 51, subpart the petitioner states that potential aging SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory A, that public and occupational degradation of the liquid and gaseous Commission (NRC) is denying a petition exposures to radiation will continue at radioactive waste management systems for rulemaking submitted by the Union the current levels below regulatory at the Hatch Nuclear Plant identified in of Concerned Scientists (UCS or the limits would only be valid if these the accompanying 10 CFR 2.206 petitioner) (PRM 54–1). The petitioner systems are covered by aging petition, may result in an increase in the requested that the NRC amend its management programs throughout the probability of and/or consequences of regulations to address concerns about license renewal term. design and licensing bases events. In potential aging degradation of liquid A notice of receipt of the petition was addition, the petitioner states that the and gaseous radioactive waste published in the Federal Register on potential aging degradation may also management systems. The bases for the July 10, 2000 (65 FR 42305). The apply to liquid and gaseous radioactive denial are that the liquid and gaseous comment period closed on September waste management systems at other radioactive waste management systems 25, 2000. The NRC received letters from plants in the United States. The are not involved in design and licensing 12 commenters. Eleven of the comment petitioner cites 10 CFR 54.4 (a)(1)(iii) 1 basis events considered for license letters opposed the petition. Ten of as the scoping criterion that has been renewal and that the existing regulatory those letters were from nuclear utilities interpreted in previous license renewal process is acceptable for maintaining and the 11th was from the Nuclear applications to exclude the liquid and the performance of the radioactive waste Energy Institute (NEI). The 12th gaseous radioactive waste management systems throughout the period of commenter, a member of the public, systems from aging management extended operation in order to keep supported the petition. A discussion of consideration under the rule. The exposures to radiation at the current the comments is provided in this petitioner also requests 10 CFR part 51 levels below regulatory limits consistent document. be revised, if appropriate, to clarify that with the conclusions made in the This rulemaking petition was the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste applicable regulations. included as part of a petition pursuant management systems must be covered ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition for to 10 CFR 2.206 in which the petitioner by aging management programs during rulemaking, the public comments detailed concerns related to the review the license renewal term. The petitioner received, and the NRC’s letter of denial of the license renewal application states that the conclusions made in to the petitioner are available for public submitted by the owner of the Hatch Appendix B to 10 CFR part 51, subpart inspection or copying for a fee, at the Nuclear Plant. Specifically, the A, that radiation exposures to the public NRC’s Public Document Room, at One petitioner was concerned that the and occupational exposures to workers White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike license renewal application for the during the license renewal term will (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. These Hatch facility did not address continue at current levels below documents are also available at the deficiencies it believed existed in the regulatory limits, were predicated on NRC’s rulemaking Web site at http:// aging management of the liquid and the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste ruleforum.llnl.gov. gaseous radioactive waste systems. The management systems not experiencing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: petitioner concluded that the greater failure rates throughout the Stephen S. Koenick, Office of Nuclear requirements pertaining to renewal of Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear operating licenses for Hatch and other 1 ‘‘The capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents which could result in Regulatory Commission, Washington, nuclear power plants do not adequately potential offsite exposures comparable to those DC 20555–0001, telephone (301) 415– address degradation from aging of liquid referred to in § 50.34(a)(1), [§ 50.67(b)(2); sic], or 1239, e-mail [email protected]. and gaseous radioactive waste systems. § 100.11 of this chapter, as applicable.’’
VerDate 11
license renewal term. However, aging coatings in general, their application, the NRC’s determination that with the degradation of the radioactive waste and their degradation. In addition, the possible exception of certain plant management systems could lead to an commenter discussed the application of systems, structures, and components, increase in component failure rates, coatings to dry casks for storing spent the regulatory process is adequate to thereby, invalidating the conclusions. nuclear fuel and the hydrogen gas ensure that the licensing bases of all Public Comments on the Petition ignition event at Point Beach Nuclear currently operating plants provide and Plant on May 28, 1996. maintain an acceptable level of safety. The NRC received letters from 12 Response: The commenter did not Also, the plant-specific licensing basis commenters. Eleven of the comment provide any additional information on letters opposed the petition. Ten of must be maintained during the renewal coatings as they apply to radioactive term in the same manner and to the those letters were from nuclear utilities waste management systems. The same extent as during the original and the 11th was from NEI. The commenter’s discussion on coatings, in licensing term. Based on this comments opposed to the petition were general, and the application to dry casks determination, the scope of the rule similar in nature and will be discussed for storing spent nuclear fuel are not together. The 12th comment was from a relevant to the issue of radioactive waste focuses on systems, structures, and member of the public who supported management system functionality. components that are of principal 2 the petition. Summaries of the Therefore, they do not support the importance to the safety of the plant. comments and NRC’s responses follow. petition. However, for information on As the petitioner concedes, the liquid Comments opposed to the petition: use of coatings under nuclear plant and gaseous radioactive waste The NEI comments were endorsed by operating licenses, the NRC issued management systems have no intended each of the utilities providing Generic Letter 98–04, ‘‘Potential for functions which are considered by the comments. NEI recommended that the Degradation of the Emergency Core Commission to be of principal NRC deny the petition on the following Cooling System and the Containment importance to the safety of the plant basis: ‘‘The design and licensing basis of Spray System After a Loss-of-Coolant- (that is why these systems do not fall the liquid and gaseous radwaste systems Accident Because of Construction and within the scope of systems, structures, are sufficiently conservative such that Protective Coating Deficiencies and and components for which aging the required analyses demonstrate that Foreign Material in Containment,’’ management must be considered for the assumed catastrophic failure of dated July 14, 1998, and Regulatory components in the systems will result in license renewal). Furthermore, the Guide 1.54, Revision 1, ‘‘Service Level doses substantially below 10 CFR Part consequences of any failure of a I, II, and III Protective Coatings Applied 100 guidelines and consistent with 10 radioactive waste component were to Nuclear Plants,’’ dated July 2000. CFR part 20 guidelines [emphasis analyzed during the initial license Both of these regulatory documents are added]. In other words, the radiological review and are bounded by the 0.5 rem relevant to coatings under nuclear plant inventory in these systems is controlled acceptance criterion, which is a small operating licenses. and limited, and a postulated event or fraction of the 10 CFR part 100 limits With respect to coatings for dry cask malfunction will not adversely impact used in the scoping criteria of license storage, specifically, the hydrogen gas public health or safety. Thus, there is no renewal cited by the petitioner. ignition event at Point Beach Nuclear safety benefit to including these systems Plant related to dry cask storage, the In the related 10 CFR 2.206 petition within the scope of license renewal for NRC issued NRC Bulletin 96–04, on the Hatch Nuclear Plant, the either aging management reviews (part ‘‘Chemical, Galvanic, or Other Reactions petitioner did not identify any new 54) or environmental impacts (part 51).’’ failure mechanisms or consequences Response: The NRC agrees in in Spent Fuel Storage and principle with the comments opposing Transportation Casks,’’ dated July 5, associated with operations of the liquid the petition because the liquid and 1996. The information requested in the or gaseous radioactive waste gaseous radioactive waste management bulletin and the subsequent safety management systems or any intended systems are conservatively designed to evaluations of the requested information functions that prevent or mitigate ensure that the consequences of are relevant to the commenter’s consequences of design basis accidents catastrophic failures of components will concerns. that would cause the NRC to reconsider be well below the scoping threshold for Reasons for Denial its determination not to specifically license renewal. However, the include radioactive waste management commenters provide a limited basis for 1. Potential Aging Degradation of the systems within the scope of license denying the petition and do not address Radioactive Waste Management renewal pursuant 10 CFR part 54. In the the petitioner’s assertion about the Systems May Increase the Probability of absence of such new information, the conclusions made in appendix B to 10 and/or Consequences of Design and NRC continues to believe that the CFR part 51, subpart A. However, as set Licensing Bases Events current regulatory process is acceptable forth below in the ‘‘Reasons for Denial,’’ The petitioner argues that radioactive to manage the performance of these the NRC staff has concluded that the waste management systems should be systems throughout the license renewal current regulatory process is adequate to covered by aging management because term without the need for additional manage the performance of these potential aging degradation may aging management considerations. systems without additional aging increase the probability of and/or Therefore, part 54 adequately maintains management consideration, so that consequences from design and licensing public health and safety as issued and radiation exposures to members of the bases events. does not need to be revised to include public and occupational exposures will The NRC does not agree that aging radioactive waste management systems. remain at current levels below degradation of these systems would regulatory limits throughout the license increase the probability of and/or renewal term. consequences of design basis events that Comment supporting the petition: The would necessitate consideration within commenter generally supported the the scope of the license renewal. The 2 ‘‘Statements of Consideration,’’ for 10 CFR part petition and was also concerned about scope of license renewal was based on 54 [60 FR 22464; May 8, 1995].
VerDate 11
2. Aging Degradation of the Radioactive effective in reducing radiation doses measure radioactivity levels in effluents. Waste Management Systems Could Lead [emphasis added].’’ These GEIS findings If there is an increase of radioactivity in to an Increase in Component Failure were therefore based upon the existence effluents beyond Technical Rates; thereby, Invalidating the of and successful implementation of Specifications, irrespective of the cause, Conclusions Made in Appendix B to 10 radiation control and mitigation then a licensee must identify the cause, CFR Part 51, Subpart A practices by licensees to comply with take corrective actions, and return the The petitioner claims that the the NRC regulatory requirements with radioactivity levels in effluents to conclusions made in Appendix B to 10 respect to radiation exposures, within Appendix I to 10 CFR part 50 CFR part 51, subpart A are predicated irrespective of the cause. design objectives. Subsequent to the For general protection against on the assumption that components of Technical Specifications being ionizing radiation, licensees must the liquid and gaseous waste exceeded, the licensee must submit a comply with 10 CFR part 20, ‘‘Standards management systems do not experience report to the NRC. for Protection Against Radiation.’’ The For occupational radiation exposures, greater failure rates throughout the regulations contain requirements for 10 CFR part 20 contain both license renewal term. radiation protection programs and occupational exposure limits and the In addressing environmental effects in specify both occupational and public ALARA requirement. To meet these Appendix B to 10 CFR part 51, the exposure limits. The underlying requirements, licensees have radiation Commission determined that the impact requirement governing radiation protection programs which routinely of radiological exposures to the pubic protection is to maintain occupational monitor plant workers for radiation and occupational exposures would be doses and doses to members of the exposure when working in radiation ‘‘small.’’ In the context of assessing public as low as is reasonably areas, including areas that contain the radiological impacts, this ‘‘small’’ achievable (ALARA). In addition to radioactive gaseous and liquid waste significance determination was defined complying with NRC standards, management systems. Operational in Footnote 3 of Table B–1 of Appendix licensees must comply with the experience has demonstrated that the B to 10 CFR part 51, Subpart A as Environmental Protection Agency’s licensees have been effective in impacts that do not exceed permissible environmental radiation standards maintaining occupational doses levels in the Commission’s regulations. contained in 40 CFR part 190, ALARA. There is nothing to suggest— The data supporting Appendix B were ‘‘Environmental Radiation Protection and the petitioner cites no new contained in NUREG–1437, ‘‘Generic Standards for Nuclear Power information in support of a Environmental Impact Statement for Operations.’’ supposition—that licensees are unable License Renewal of Nuclear Plants’’ Early industry experience or unwilling to address ALARA taking (hereinafter the GEIS). demonstrated that licensees generally into account any possible failures of Contrary to the petitioner’s assertion, maintained exposures to radiation and radioactive waste management systems the conclusions in the GEIS relied on releases of radioactivity in effluents at resulting from aging degradation. the current regulatory process which levels well below 10 CFR part 20 limits. Aside from the licensees practices and manages the performance of the To enhance the regulatory framework programs for ALARA and Technical radioactive waste management systems for 10 CFR part 20 for assuring that Specifications compliance, the NRC has to control radioactivity in effluents to releases of radioactivity in effluents are an inspection program that includes the below permissible levels, irrespective of ALARA, the NRC issued 10 CFR 50.34a, liquid and gaseous radioactive waste any system degradation. For radiation 10 CFR 50.36a,3 and Appendix I to 10 management systems. Although these exposures to the public, the GEIS states, CFR part 50.4 To comply with these systems have historically been ‘‘Radiation doses to members of the regulations, licensees must identify considered to have a low risk public from current operation of nuclear design objectives, and the means to be significance because of the nuclear power plants have been examined from employed, for keeping levels of industry’s compliance with the ALARA a variety of perspectives and the radioactive material in effluents to design objectives in appendix I to 10 impacts were found to be well within unrestricted areas ALARA during CFR part 50, routine, periodic design objectives and regulations in normal operations, including expected inspections are required in order to each instance. No effect of aging that operational occurrences. The licensees’ maintain confidence that the systems would significantly affect the Technical Specifications require that are actually maintaining doses from radioactive effluents has been operating procedures for the control of radioactive effluents ALARA. Thus, the identified.’’ The GEIS concludes, ‘‘No effluents be established and followed; liquid and gaseous radioactive waste mitigation measures beyond those that equipment installed in the management systems are explicitly implemented during the current term radioactive waste system is maintained identified in NRC Inspection Procedure license would be warranted because and used; and that effluent releases are 71122, ‘‘Public Radiation Safety.’’ The current mitigation practices have reported. To implement the Technical objective of the inspection is to verify resulted in declining public radiation Specifications, the licensees are that the licensee is providing adequate doses and are expected to continue to required to establish a surveillance and protection of public health and safety do so.’’ For occupational exposures, the monitoring program to detect and from exposure to radioactive material GEIS concludes, ‘‘the average dose released into the public domain as a increase of 5 to 8 percent to the typical 3 10 CFR 50.34a, ‘‘Design Objectives for result of the routine operation of nuclear plant worker would still maintain doses Equipment to Control Releases of Radioactive power plants. The inspections focus on well below regulatory limits. Therefore, Material in Effluents—Nuclear Power Reactors,’’ both the gaseous and liquid effluent and § 50.36a, ‘‘Technical Specifications on Effluents occupational radiation exposure during From Nuclear Power Reactors’’ [35 FR 18385; treatment systems and the radiological the term of the renewed license meets December 3, 1970]. environmental monitoring programs. the standard of small significance. No 4 Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, ‘‘Numerical There is also a corresponding inspection mitigation measures beyond those Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting procedure for occupational radiation Conditions for Operation To Meet the Criterion ‘‘As implemented during the current term Low As Is Reasonably Achievable’’ for Radioactive safety. The primary objective of NRC license would be warranted because the Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Inspection Procedure 71121, ALARA process continues to be Reactor Effluents’ [40 FR 19442; May 5, 1975]. ‘‘Occupational Radiation Safety,’’ is to
VerDate 11
gather information to verify that a CFR parts 51 and 54, then the NRC may regulations/laws/ Federal/propose.html licensee is meeting the objective of revisit the need for rulemaking. and may be inspected and photocopied ensuring adequate protection of worker For the reasons cited in this at the FDIC Public Information Center, health and safety from exposure to document, the NRC denies the petition. Room 100, 801 17th Street, NW., radiation from radioactive material Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and during routine operation. of December, 2001. 4:30 p.m. on business days. In addition to performing these For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: inspection procedures, NRC resident William D. Travers, Thomas Bolt, (202) 736–0168; or inspectors regularly tour the plant, Rodney Ray, (202) 898–3556. including areas containing radioactive Executive Director for Operations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: waste management systems. If a [FR Doc. 01–30927 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] degraded condition is identified by the BILLING CODE 7590–01–P I. Background licensee or reported to the licensee by For receiverships established after the NRC, the condition is evaluated and August 10, 1993, payment of corrective action taken as appropriate in FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION receivership claims is governed by accordance with the plant’s corrective section 11(d)(11)(A) of the Federal action program. In addition, condition Deposit Insurance Act, which section is reports are trended by licensees. Further 12 CFR Part 360 also known as the national depositor evaluation is done and appropriate RIN 3064–AB92 preference statute. Because the national corrective actions are taken if an adverse depositor preference statute does not trend is identified. Periodic inspections Payment of Post-insolvency Interest in specifically mention post-insolvency of the corrective action program are Receiverships With Surplus Funds interest, and in the absence of a conducted in accordance with NRC AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance regulation regarding its payment, the Inspection Procedure 71152, Corporation. FDIC’s practice in receiverships subject ‘‘Identification and Resolution of to the national depositor preference Problems,’’ to verify that licensees are ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. statute that have surplus funds has been identifying and correcting plant SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit to follow the common law rule. The problems. The regulatory oversight Insurance Corporation is publishing for process increases public confidence and common law rule is that post- notice and comment a proposed rule insolvency interest should be paid pro complements the performance-based regarding the payment of post- regulations that establish exposure rata to all creditors regardless of insolvency interest in insured priority. The exception to this approach limits and design objectives to not only depository institution receiverships meet those limits but to keep is the case of an institution subject to a with surplus funds. The purpose of the state law that specifically provides for a radiological dose levels ALARA. rule is to establish a single uniform In summary, the NRC has regulatory different distribution priority. (Several interest rate, calculation method, and states’ statutes provide that after the requirements and licensees implement payment priority for post-insolvency programs and practices that provide principal amounts of all claims within interest. The proposed rule provides reasonable assurance that exposures to the same class have been satisfied, that where funds remain after the radiation will remain within interest is to be paid at the same priority satisfaction of the principal amount of permissible levels consistent with as the claim on which it accrues.) With all creditor claims, post-insolvency Appendix I to 10 CFR part 50 design respect to the interest rate for post- interest will be paid in the order of objectives for public exposures and insolvency interest, the FDIC, in priority set forth in section 11(d)(11)(A) within 10 CFR part 20 limits and receiverships subject to the national of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act; ALARA for occupational exposures, depositor preference statute, has used paid at the coupon equivalent yield of irrespective of the cause. The the federal judgment rate for federal or the average discount rate set on the Commission has determined that ‘‘federalized’’ institutions (state- maintaining doses within these design three-month Treasury bill at the last chartered institutions where the FDIC objectives and dose limits represent auction held by the United States has exercised its self-appointment ‘‘small’’ environmental consequences. Treasury Department during the authority under section 11(c) of the FDI The petitioner did not raise any preceding calendar quarter; adjusted Act). For state institutions, the FDIC information that would challenge the each quarter after the receivership is used the applicable rate provided for by conclusions of the GEIS that the impacts established; and based on a simple state law. Consequently, different of radiation doses to the public and interest method of calculation. distribution priorities and interest rates occupational exposures will be ‘‘small’’ DATES: Comments must be received by have been used depending on the type for the license renewal term. February 19, 2002. of institution involved and the ADDRESSES: Send written comments to applicable law. Conclusion Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, In December 2000, Congress granted The NRC staff finds that the Attention: comments/OES, Federal the FDIC express rulemaking authority information presented in the petition Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th regarding the payment of post- does not support rulemaking to revise Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429. insolvency interest in receiverships 10 CFR parts 51 and 54 to include aging Comments may be hand-delivered to the with surplus funds. The American management of the liquid and gaseous guard station located at the rear of the Homeownership and Economic radioactive waste management systems 17th Street building on F Street on Opportunity Act of 2000 added new during the license renewal term. If new business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. subparagraph (C) to section 11(d)(10) of information in the future provides a Comments may also be faxed or emailed the FDI Act, which reads as follows: basis that aging degradation of the (FAX number (202) 898–3838; Internet (C) Rulemaking Authority of Corporation. liquid and gaseous radioactive waste address: [email protected]). The Corporation may prescribe such rules, management systems needs aging Comments may be posted on the FDIC including definitions of terms, as it deems management consideration under 10 internet site at http://www.fdic.gov/ appropriate to establish a single uniform
VerDate 11
interest rate for or to make payment of post- The alternative approach would be to combination of this approach with insolvency interest to creditors holding follow the common law rule and pay federal tax laws and tax regulations, proven claims against the receivership estates post-insolvency interest on a pro rata however, may result in the federal of insured Federal or State depository basis to all creditors, without regard to income tax claims against the institutions following satisfaction by the receivership being paid only after all of receiver of the principal amount of all the priority of payment of the principal creditor claims. amount of a creditor’s claim under the other receivership creditors section 11(d)(11)(A). Depending on the (including subordinated debt holders) By virtue of this rulemaking authority, amount of assets available in a had received post-insolvency interest the proposed rule regarding post- receivership to pay post-insolvency payments, but before any distributions insolvency interest would preempt any interest, either approach could affect the were made to the equityholders of the inconsistent state law by providing a recoveries of certain classes of failed institution. single uniform interest rate and priority creditors.2 Another component of the proposed of distribution for post-insolvency If post-insolvency interest was paid to rule involves the interest rate to be interest in receiverships established receivership creditors based on the applied for purposes of calculating post- after the rule becomes effective. See City priority accorded the principal amount insolvency interest payments. The FDIC of New York v. FCC, 486 U.S. 57, 63 of a creditor’s claim under section believes a publicly available, market- (1988) (regulation promulgated by 11(d)(11)(A), creditors holding deposit based rate would be preferable to a federal agency acting within the scope claims (including the FDIC’s subrogated single numerical interest rate because of its congressionally delegated deposit claim against the receivership) the market-based rate should be more authority may preempt state law). The would receive all of their post- reflective of the interest rate proposed rule will apply to insolvency interest payments, before the environment in existence during the life receiverships established after the receivership creditors holding claims in of future receiverships. In addition, as effective date of the rule. Historically, the lower priority classes received any indicated earlier, the FDIC has utilized relatively few receiverships have post-insolvency interest payments. This the federal judgment rate in generated sufficient recoveries to enable approach, therefore, would result in receiverships of federally chartered post-insolvency interest to be paid. post-insolvency interest payments being institutions and in federalized Consequently, the proposed rule will made to the depositors of the failed receiverships of state institutions to probably apply to only a small number institution, but it may also result in calculate post-insolvency interest of receiverships in the future. little or no post-insolvency interest payments. In the proposed rule, however, the post-insolvency interest II. The Proposed Rule payments being made to creditors holding claims in the lower priority rate for all FDIC-administered New section 11(d)(10)(C) of the FDI classes. Also, if federal income tax receiverships would be based on the Act provides that post-insolvency claims have been allowed against the coupon equivalent yield of the average interest will be paid after satisfaction of receivership estate, this approach, discount rate set on the three-month the principal amount of all creditor combined with federal tax laws and tax Treasury bill, rather than the federal claims. The proposed rule provides that regulations, may result in the federal judgment rate. This rate was selected, after the satisfaction of the principal income tax claims being paid pro rata instead of the federal judgment rate, amount of all creditor claims, post- with post-insolvency interest payments because the three-month Treasury bill is insolvency interest will be paid in the to the general creditors of the considered to be widely recognized as a order of priority set forth in section receivership estate.3 cash management investment 11(d)(11)(A), the national depositor Alternatively, if post-insolvency performance benchmark and its yield preference statute. This differs from the interest was paid to all receivership has historically tracked, to some degree, FDIC’s existing practice of following the creditors holding allowed claims on a changes in the rate of inflation. common law rule that post-insolvency pro rata basis, regardless of the priority Whether the interest rate should be interest should be paid pro rata to all accorded the principal amount of the fixed or ‘‘float’’ is also an issue creditors regardless of priority, except in underlying claim under section addressed in the proposed rule. Presently, when a new receivership is the case of an institution subject to a 11(d)(11)(A), all of the receivership’s established, if assets ultimately become state law that specifically provides for a creditors (except the Internal Revenue available for post-insolvency interest different distribution priority. Service) would receive a pro rata share payments, the rate that exists on the Nevertheless, the approach in the of the assets available for post- date the receivership is established is proposed rule appears to be more insolvency interest payments. Again, a consistent with Congress’s objective, as fixed for purposes of calculating post- insolvency interest. This approach is expressed in the national depositor creditors. See H.R. Rep. No. 111, 103d Cong., 1st preference statute, that the deposit Sess. 1993, U.S.C.C.A.N. 378. consistent with the way the federal liabilities be preferred over other 2 The following discussion is provided to judgment rate is applied to judgments illustrate the potential impact that selecting one entered by the federal courts because liabilities in the liquidation of an distribution method over the other could have on 1 the allowance of a claim against a insured depository institution. different classes of receivership creditors. The FDIC believes, however, that the actual impact of either receivership estate has been viewed as 1 According to the legislative history, Congress approach will depend significantly on the the general equivalent of a judgment enacted depositor preference primarily to reduce particular facts and circumstances surrounding being entered against the receivership the FDIC’s cost of resolving failed institutions by future receiverships, therefore, the following estate. This approach may not be increasing its recoveries as subrogee of insured discussion is based on generalized observations of reflective, however, of the economic deposit claims, thereby benefiting the deposit how receivership distributions in future FDIC- insurance funds. ‘‘Under depositor preference, the administered receiverships might be affected and is conditions and interest rate FDIC and RTC will have a first claim on the assets not an attempt to describe definitively how any environment in existence during the life of all failed banks and thrifts, thereby increasing the particular class of creditors will be affected by of the receivership. Therefore, the savings to the Federal deposit insurance funds.’’ either approach. proposed rule provides that the post- 139 Con. Rec. H6150 (daily ed. Aug. 5, 1993) 3 The proposed rule would not affect the (statement of Rep. Gonzalez). Furthermore, calculation or accrual of interest on any federal insolvency interest rate would be Congress was aware that depositor preference income tax liability pursuant to sections 6601 and adjusted quarterly. This is being would result in diminished recoveries for general 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code. proposed to mitigate interest rate risk
VerDate 11
due to changes in economic conditions VI. The Treasury and General receivership by a court with jurisdiction during the life of the receivership. Government Appropriations Act, to adjudicate the claim. Finally, the proposed rule provides 1999—Assessment of Federal (c) Post-insolvency interest that post-insolvency interest Regulations and Policies on Families distributions. (1) Post-insolvency distributions would be calculated using The FDIC has determined that the interest shall only be distributed following satisfaction by the receiver of a simple interest method, rather than a proposed rule will not affect family the principal amount of all creditor compound interest method. The simple well-being within the meaning of section 654 of the Treasury and General claims. interest method is proposed because it (2) The receiver shall distribute post- appears to provide a reasonable amount Government Appropriations Act, enacted as part of the Omnibus insolvency interest at the post- of interest to compensate receivership insolvency interest rate prior to making creditors for the time value of money Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of any distribution to equityholders. Post- owed from the time the receivership is insolvency interest distributions shall established until dividend payments are 1999 (Public Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681). be made in the order of priority set forth received. in section 11(d)(11)(A) of the Federal List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 360 III. Request for Public Comment Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. Banks, banking, Savings associations. 1821(d)(11)(A). The FDIC hereby solicits comments For the reasons set forth in the (3) Post-insolvency interest on all aspects of the proposed rule, and preamble, the FDIC Board of Directors distributions shall be made at such time specifically whether post-insolvency proposes to amend 12 CFR part 360 as as the receiver determines that such interest should be paid according to the follows: distributions are appropriate and only to order of priority described in the the extent of funds available in the PART 360—RESOLUTION AND national depositor preference statute or receivership estate. Post-insolvency RECEIVERSHIP RULES alternatively pro rata to all creditors interest shall be distributed on the regardless of priority. 1. The authority for part 360 is revised outstanding balance of a proven claim, to read as follows: as reduced from time to time by any IV. Paperwork Reduction Act interim dividend distributions, from the Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1821(d)(1), date the receivership is established until The proposed rule will not involve 1821(d)(10)(C), 1821(d)(11), 1821(e)(1), such time as the principal amount of a any collection of information under the 1821(e)(8)(D)(i), 1823(c)(4), 1823(e)(2); Sec. 401(h), Pub. L .101–73, 103 Stat. 357. proven claim has been distributed but Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. not thereafter. 3501 et seq.). Consequently, no 2. Section 360.7 is added to part 360 (4) Post-insolvency interest shall be information has been submitted to the to read as follows: determined using a simple interest Office of Management and Budget for § 360.7 Post-insolvency interest. method of calculation. review. (a) Purpose and scope. This section By order of the Board of Directors. V. Regulatory Flexibility Act establishes rules governing the Dated at Washington, DC this 10th day of calculation and distribution of post- December, 2001. Pursuant to section 605(b) of the insolvency interest to creditors with Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 proven claims in all FDIC-administered Robert E. Feldman, et seq.) the FDIC certifies that the receiverships established after [effective Executive Secretary. proposed rule will not have a significant date of final rule]. [FR Doc. 01–31162 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] economic impact on a substantial (b) Definitions—(1) Equityholder. The BILLING CODE 6714–01–P number of small entities. The proposed owner of an equity interest in a failed rule will only apply to FDIC- depository institution, whether such administered receiverships established ownership is represented by stock, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND after the effective date of the rule, and membership in a mutual association, or URBAN DEVELOPMENT it does not impose new reporting, otherwise. recordkeeping or other compliance (2) Post-insolvency interest. Interest Office of Federal Housing Enterprise requirements on receivership creditors. calculated from the date the Oversight The proposed rule continues the FDIC’s receivership is established on proven existing practice of making post- creditor claims in receiverships with 12 CFR Part 1750 surplus funds. insolvency interest distributions to RIN 2550–AA23 (3) Post-insolvency interest rate. For creditors holding proven claims in any calendar quarter, the coupon surplus receiverships prior to making Risk-Based Capital equivalent yield of the average discount distributions to equityholders, based on rate set on the three-month Treasury bill AGENCY: Office of Federal Housing their equity interests, in a failed insured at the last auction held by the United Enterprise Oversight, HUD. depository institution. In addition, the States Treasury Department during the ACTION: Proposed regulation. proposed rule will provide interested preceding calendar quarter, and parties, including small entities, with adjusted each quarter thereafter. SUMMARY: The Office of Federal Housing greater certainty in future FDIC- (4) Principal amount. The proven Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) is administered receiverships by claim amount and any interest accrued proposing to amend Appendix A to establishing a single uniform interest thereon as of the date the receivership Subpart B of 12 CFR Part 1750 Risk- rate and method for making post- is established. Based Capital. The effect of these insolvency interest distributions. (5) Proven claim. A claim that is amendments would be to modify Accordingly, the Act’s requirements allowed by a receiver or upon which a provisions relating to counterparty relating to an initial regulatory final non-appealable judgment has been haircuts, multifamily loans, and flexibility analysis are not applicable. entered in favor of a claimant against a refunding and to make several technical
VerDate 11
adjustments and corrections. These assets, liabilities, and off-balance-sheet period, except for haircuts for below- amendments are intended to refine the obligations under severe credit and investment-grade providers and stress test model to tie capital more interest rate stress for a period of ten instruments, which are applied fully in closely to risk. years (stress period). The stress test the first month of the stress period. DATES: Written comments must be projects rates of default and prepayment The Rule applies one set of haircuts received by January 17, 2002. for the mortgages guaranteed by the for non-derivative counterparties and securities, based on analysis of ADDRESSES: Send written comments Enterprises, as well as cash flows from historical bond default rates, and a concerning the proposal to Alfred these and other assets, liabilities, and different set of haircuts for derivative Pollard, General Counsel, Office of off-balance-sheet obligations. Using counterparties, reflecting lower Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, these cash flows, the stress test expected loss severities associated with Fourth Floor, 1700 G Street, NW., produces monthly balance sheets for the 120 months of the stress period in order the use of strong collateral agreements. Washington, DC 20552. Written to determine the amount of starting To further refine the Rule’s treatment of comments may also be sent to Mr. capital that would be necessary to haircuts, OFHEO proposes to improve Pollard by electronic mail at maintain positive capital during the ten- consistency between haircuts for [email protected]. OFHEO year stress period. Thirty percent of the derivative counterparties and securities requests that written comments amount of capital so determined is then and non-derivative counterparties and submitted in hard copy also be added to that amount to protect against securities by specifying default and accompanied by the electronic version management and operations risk. severity rates separately; to extend the in MS Word or in portable document OFHEO continuously seeks to phase-in period from five to ten years; format (PDF) on 3.5″ disk. improve its measurements and formulas to provide for netting of exposures to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to tie capital more closely to risk and the same derivative counterparty; and to Edward J. Szymanoski, Acting Associate works to ensure that the Rule supports provide for an exception to the BBB Director, Office of Risk Analysis and the safety and soundness regime created haircut for certain unrated seller/ Model Development, telephone (202) by Congress. In the preamble to the servicers as described in the proposed 414–3763 (not a toll-free number), or Rule, OFHEO expressed its intention to rule. David Felt, Associate General Counsel, review, on an ongoing basis, the Default Rates. OFHEO proposes to use telephone (202) 414–3750 (not a toll-free operation of the stress test and its the Rule’s haircut rates for non- number), Office of Federal Housing various components and to evaluate the derivative counterparties and securities Enterprise Oversight, Fourth Floor, 1700 need for revisions and improvements. as the cumulative default rates for all G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552. Also, OFHEO committed to act counterparties and securities, but to The telephone number for the expeditiously to remedy any technical lower slightly the default rate for AA- Telecommunications Device for the Deaf and operational issues that arise during rated firms. After re-evaluating the is (800) 877–8339. the one-year implementation period historical data on differences in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: following promulgation. OFHEO is now performance of AA-rated and AAA- proposing to make refinements and Comments rated firms, including data that recently technical adjustments and corrections to has become available to OFHEO, the The Office of Federal Housing the Rule to tie capital more closely to Rule’s default ratio of three to one Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) invites risk. Technical changes are included in (based largely on the average exposure comments on the proposed regulation this proposal rather than issued as a over the past 80 years) appears to be and will take all comments into final regulation to provide a more than is warranted for a period of consideration before issuing the final comprehensive package of changes. economic stress. Data were recently regulation. Copies of all comments will A. Proposed Changes to Counterparty made available to OFHEO by Moody’s be posted on the OFHEO internet web Haircuts Investors Service 2 for the worst annual site at http://www.ofheo.gov. In cohorts of U.S. investment-grade issuers addition, copies of all comments The Rule gives the Enterprises credit since 1920, the cohorts formed at the for cash payments that would be received will be available for beginning of 1929, 1930, and 1931. The received during the stress period from examination by the public at the Office average 10-year default rate for AA-rated securities and various counterparties, of Federal Housing Enterprise issuers (12.25 percent) was 2.6 times as such as mortgage insurance companies Oversight, Fourth Floor, 1700 G Street, large as the average default rate for and derivative counterparties. However, NW., Washington, DC 20552. AAA-rated issuers (4.72 percent), and because Enterprise counterparties are the ratio for the worst of those years was Background themselves likely to be adversely only 2.2. Furthermore, a study of affected by the economic conditions of On September 13, 2001, OFHEO corporate bond quality by W. Braddock the stress period and to default on some published a final regulation setting forth Hickman shows 12-year default rates for 1 or all of their obligations, the stress test a risk-based capital stress test, (Rule) the cohort formed at the beginning of that is the basis for determining the risk- discounts the value of cash payments received during the stress period by a 1928 for AA-rated issuers (12.3 percent) based capital requirement for the to be 1.5 times as large as that for AAA- Federally sponsored housing specified percentage, based on the 3 public credit rating of the security or rated issuers (8.1 percent). More recent enterprises—Federal National Mortgage data, in relatively favorable economic Association (Fannie Mae) and Federal counterparty. The amount by which cash payments from a counterparty or Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 2 For purposes of this proposal, Moody’s Investors (Freddie Mac) (collectively, the security are discounted in each month Service provided information on ‘‘Letter Enterprises). The risk-based capital of the stress period is the haircut. The Cumulative Default Rates (from 01/01/29 to 01/01/ stress test set forth in the Rule simulates specified haircut percentages increase as 31)’’ on October 16, 2001. Data may be obtained the credit rating declines—the lower from Moody’s Investors Service by contacting Mr. the performance of each Enterprise’s Steve Liebling at Liebling@Moody’s.com. that rating, the more severe the haircut. 3 W. Braddock Hickman, ‘‘Corporate Bond 1 Risk-based Capital, 66 FR 47730 (September 13, In the Rule, the haircuts are phased in Quality and Investor Experience,’’ 190 National 2001). over the first five years of the stress Bureau of Economic Research (1958).
VerDate 11
circumstances, also show greater defaults in 1930 to 1943.7 Moody’s has To develop loss severity rates for similarity in the performance of issuers reported average recovery rate estimates defaulted derivative contracts, OFHEO in these two rating categories. However, that are substantially lower during examined changes in Treasury security a partially offsetting factor is that recessions, and fall as low as 20 percent interest rates over periods of ten Moody’s data for both depression during the 1930s.8 For 1930 to 1943, business days during the past 25 years. cohorts and averages of all cohorts show Moody’s average was 36 percent, For five-year Treasury securities, that defaults of AAA-rated issuers that despite higher rates during the latter increases in yields of more than 7.5 occur within 10 years after the cohort is years of that period. A somewhat lower percent and decreases of more than 5.0 formed occur later in the 10-year period projection for the stress period used in percent, respectively, have occurred than those of AA-rated issuers. the rule is, therefore, appropriate. infrequently-roughly 1 percent and 4 The relationship between AA and All of the recovery studies show some percent, respectively, of the time.10 AAA defaults is particularly relevant differences in recovery rates depending Thus, severity rates that reflect losses because most Enterprise counterparty on the presence or absence of secured or associated with yield changes of these and security exposures are either AAA- subordinated status. However, such magnitudes should be reasonably or AA-rated. An excessive differential status is a factor used in determining conservative. between these ratings in the stress test ratings. Moody’s expressly states that For application in the stress test’s could create inappropriate business securities with different status may have cash flow model, OFHEO must translate incentives for the Enterprises. After similar probabilities of default, but be such changes into impacts on net weighing the above considerations, rated differently in recognition of the derivative cash flows. During the stress OFHEO proposes to lower the effect of security or subordination on period, net derivative cash flows are cumulative default rate for AA-rated likely recoveries.9 Thus, a secured related to changes in the ten-year counterparties and securities to 12.5 instrument may have a somewhat higher Treasury yield-75 percent in the up-rate percent (from 15 percent), which will be probability of default than average for scenario and 50 percent in the down- 2.5 times the rate for AAA-rated its rating, but also have a somewhat rate scenario. For example, in the up- counterparties and securities. higher expectation of recovery. rate scenario, with its flat yield curve, Severity Rates. To further refine risk Accordingly, OFHEO proposes to the pay side of a ten-year pay-fixed/ measurement in the stress test, OFHEO specify a recovery rate of 30 percent (70 receive-floating swap implemented just proposes to take explicit account of percent loss severity rate) for all non- before the start of the stress test would potential recoveries in the event of derivative counterparties and securities remain at its original rate and the default by introducing a loss severity with investment-grade ratings. receive side would rise to 175 percent factor. Before issuing the Rule, OFHEO OFHEO also proposes to maintain, of the original pay-side rate. Thus, the received mixed comments regarding with alteration, special treatment for swap would have net annual cash flows incorporation of recovery projections for derivative counterparty exposures. for the last nine years of the stress test non-derivative security and Current exposures are marked to market roughly equal to 75 percent of the initial counterparty obligations after default. at least weekly, and high quality fixed rate used in the swap multiplied Such recoveries were not part of the collateral is posted against any by the notional value. This is ten times proposed rule, however, and OFHEO significant exposures by counterparties the 7.5 percent market yield change that decided not to include them at that with less than a AAA rating. The may be associated with losses on a time, pending further consideration. Enterprises retain the right to require derivative counterparty default in the Historically, corporate bond recoveries substantial over-collateralization or to up-rate scenario. Accordingly, OFHEO have averaged about 40 percent (i.e., a transfer the contract to a new proposes to set severity rates for 60 percent loss severity rate) over long counterparty if a counterparty’s rating is derivative exposures at ten percent.11 periods of time. A study of default and lowered to low investment-grade levels OFHEO recognizes that losses could recovery rates by Moody’s shows an or worse. Thus, the principal risk is that be greater than ten percent if interest average recovery rate of 39 percent over a relatively highly rated counterparty rates move exceptionally after a sudden the past 20 years.4 A study of defaulted may fail suddenly and that exposures default, or if an Enterprise failed to bond recoveries by Standard and Poor’s rise between the time a contract was last replace a contract with a defaulting shows an average recovery rate of 44 collateralized and the time the counterparty and market yields percent from 1981 to 1997.5 The Enterprise takes action to transfer or Hickman study shows an average replace the contract. This period may be 10 These percentages correspond to absolute changes of 61 and 41 basis points, on average, recovery rate of 43 percent for large as much as ten business days. during the period, but would be less than half as issues from 1900 to 1943.6 Recoveries The credit exposures on fixed-floating much at recent yield levels. on Enterprise holdings of mortgage and interest rate swaps and swaptions (the 11 Loss severities of counterparty defaults are other asset-backed securities and on vast majority of Enterprise derivative typically expressed as percentages of derivative contracts) are closely tied to changes in market value at the time of default. However, the mortgage insurance claims would likely stress test model reflects such losses as reductions be substantial also, benefiting from asset market yields of securities with in net derivative cash flows. For example, in the up- values in the former case and premium maturities equal to those of the swap or rate stress scenario, after a 75 percent increase in income in the latter. swaptions. When interest rates rise, an interest rates, a swap with a market value of zero Enterprise’s exposure rises on swaps for at the start of the stress test (i.e., a fixed-pay rate Data on recoveries in unusually equal to the then-market rate) will have a stressful times are less favorable. which it receives the floating-rate side significantly increased market value during the Hickman reported an average recovery of the swap. When interest rates fall, an stress period. Since short- and long-term rates are rate of 34 percent for large issues for Enterprises’s exposure rises on swaps the same in the last nine years of the stress period for which it receives the fixed-rate side. in the up-rate scenario, net derivative cash flows roughly equal the scenario-based change in long- 4 ‘‘Default Recovery Rates of Corporate Bond term interest rates multiplied by the notional value, Issues: 2000,’’ 26 Moody’s Investor’s Service 7 Hickman, at 119. and the market value of the swap is the discounted (February 2001). 8 ‘‘Historical Default Rates of Corporate Bond present value of these cash flows. A ten percent 5 ‘‘Ratings Performance 1997: Stability of Issuers, 1920–1996,’’ 12 Moody’s Investor Service reduction in those cash flows thus reflects the Transition,’’ 3 Standard and Poor’s (August 1998). (January 1997). impact on market value of a 7.5 percent change in 6 Hickman, at 460. 9 Moody’s (2001), at 24–25. interest rates.
VerDate 11
continued to move unfavorably. recoveries beyond the collateral already default rate for each rating category by However, OFHEO also recognizes that held might be available. Thus, OFHEO the severity rate. The resulting haircuts yield changes near the time of a default judges that a ten percent severity rate for that are proposed are set forth in Table could easily be less unfavorable than the derivatives is adequate. 1 below. 7.5 percent increase or 5 percent Haircuts. Under the proposal, haircuts decrease contemplated, and some would be determined by multiplying the
TABLE 1—STRESS TEST HAIRCUT BY RATINGS CLASSIFICATION
Non-Derivative Derivative Contract Ratings Classification Contract Counterparties Counterparties or Instruments
Cash 0% 0%
AAA 0.5% 3.5%
AA 1.25% 8.75%
A 2% 14%
BBB 4% 28%
Below BBB and Unrated 100% 100%
Phase-In. Under the Rule, haircuts for years to ten years for investment-grade counterparty.12 No comments were investment-grade counterparties and counterparties and securities. Thus, for received on the proposal, and the Rule, securities are phased-in over the first credit exposures to firms and securities reflecting OFHEO’s intent to model five years of the stress period, so that rated BBB and higher, defaults will master netting agreements, did not haircuts are close to zero in the first occur evenly throughout the stress specify a change from NPR2. However, month of the stress period and rise to period. due to a technical omission, OFHEO’s their maximums in the 60th month, Netting of derivative counterparty intent to model master netting where they remain for the last five exposures. The Enterprises regularly agreements was not operationalized in years. In effect, all defaults occur within enter into derivatives contracts, the Rule. Recognition of master netting the first five years, and later haircuts to typically swaps, for debt and portfolio agreements would result in a more cash flows simply reflect the risk management purposes. These accurate measurement of the consequences of previous defaults, as contracts expose the Enterprises to the Enterprises’ exposure to derivative defaulted counterparties are unable to risk of failure by a derivative counterparties. Further, recognition of meet their obligations. This conservative counterparty to perform its obligations master netting agreements is consistent approach takes into account that the as anticipated by the terms of the with OFHEO’s intent to model interest rate shocks and house price contract. The Enterprises, consistent Enterprise contracts according to their shocks all occur in the first half of the with accepted risk management and respective terms, and such recognition stress period. Long-term average market practice, attempt to mitigate allows OFHEO to tie capital to risk with historical data show more evenly their derivative counterparty credit greater precision. The proposal would distributed defaults over time, but exposure through a number of methods, amend the Rule to model master netting available data for especially stressful including the use of master netting agreements explicitly, as originally periods (e.g., the 1910s and 1930s) give agreements. Master netting agreements contemplated in NPR2. little indication of timing. The recently are used by the Enterprises when they OFHEO notes that this technical obtained unpublished data from engage in multiple swap transactions correction will require an Moody’s shows that for the worst cohort with the same counterparty. A master implementation period to allow for (starting in the beginning of 1930), only netting agreement permits an Enterprise development and completion of the 57 percent of ten-year investment-grade to determine its aggregate total credit software changes that will allow OFHEO defaults occurred during the first five exposure to a particular counterparty by to model master netting agreements. years. While the principal shocks may netting the gains and losses across all of Therefore, during the implementation of occur somewhat earlier in the stress the contracts with that counterparty. the technical correction, OFHEO will period than they did for issuers in the This approach allows the Enterprises to recognize the risk mitigation effects of 1930s, a closer approximation of the net their exposures at the counterparty such agreements by reducing the historical patterns may better reflect the level, rather than netting at the haircuts for derivatives contracts. Upon ability of most highly rated firms to individual contract level. implementation of the technical survive severe stresses for many years. In NPR2, OFHEO proposed a correction, maximum haircuts for Some of those that ultimately fail during methodology to recognize this practice derivative contract counterparties will the stress period may reasonably be by modeling the terms of master netting be readjusted and netting by expected to fail during its final years. agreements and then applying specified counterparty will be implemented in the Accordingly, OFHEO proposes to haircuts to the resulting net amount software. The interim treatment will extend the phase-in period from five due, if any, from each derivatives remain effective only for the period
12 NPR2 refers to the Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by OFHEO before the Rule. 64 FR 18084, 18159 (April 13, 1999).
VerDate 11
required to complete the technical model master netting agreements. The contract counterparties are as shown in software modifications necessary to interim and final haircuts for derivative the Table 2 below:
TABLE 2—STRESS TEST HAIRCUTS FOR DERIVATIVE CONTRACT COUNTERPARTIES
Haircuts for Haircuts for Derivative Derivative Counterparties Counterparties Number of Ratings Classification prior to Imple- upon Imple- Phase-in mentation of mentation of Months Netting Netting
Cash 0% 0% N/A
AAA 0.3% 0.5% 120
AA 0.75% 1.25% 120
A 1.2% 2.0% 120
BBB 2.4% 4.0% 120
Below BBB and Unrated 100% 100%1
Unrated Seller/servicers. The Rule model include (1) a respecification of than one means that the NOI is treats unrated seller/servicers as BBB- explanatory variables which has the insufficient to cover the required rated counterparties. OFHEO recognizes effects of reducing the model’s mortgage payment, an occurrence that that certain unrated seller-servicers to sensitivity to debt-service coverage suggests a high probability of default. whom underwriting and servicing ratios (DCRs) falling below one and The stress test projects the DCR in each authority has been delegated enter into reducing predicted cumulative default month of the stress period from the loss-sharing agreements with the rates on adjustable rate mortgages prior month’s value by updating NOI, Enterprises and collateralize these loss- (ARMs) in the up-rate stress test, and (2) using rent growth rates and rental sharing obligations with fully funded an increase to the initial vacancy rate vacancy rates that reflect the economic reserve accounts pledged to the used to update DCR during the stress conditions of the benchmark region and Enterprise. OFHEO is proposing to test making this rate consistent with the period, and adjusting mortgage amend the Rule to permit a higher rating benchmark region’s vacancy rate from payments monthly according to the note than BBB for these seller-servicers if the the month prior to the start of the terms and the stress test interest rate fully funded reserve account is equal to benchmark period.13 OFHEO is also scenario. When this method is used to or greater than an amount determined proposing changes for the multifamily project DCR, the types of loans for by OFHEO to be adequate to support the loss severity parameters that reflect the which the projected DCR falls below risk borne by the seller-servicer under costs, timing, and recoveries associated one tend to be fixed rate mortgages the loss sharing agreement. For with a larger and more broad-based set (FRMs) that started the stress test with example, if the loss-sharing obligation of of Enterprise foreclosures. The Rule a low DCR and, in the up-rate scenario, a seller-servicer participating in Fannie reflects a decision not to model the most ARM loans, resulting in Mae’s Delegated Underwriting and complexities of prepayment premiums comparatively high cumulative default Servicing (DUS) Program is that may or may not be received by the rates for these loans in the stress test. collateralized by a fully funded reserve Enterprises during stressful periods OFHEO has found that the UWDCRF account that is equal to or greater than without further study. The proposed adds value to the multifamily default one percent of the seller-servicer’s multifamily prepayment speeds are model by capturing the additional risk aggregate unpaid principal balance more consistent with that decision than of default when NOI is insufficient to covered by the loss-sharing agreement at existing pre-payment speeds. Each cover mortgage payments, but is the start of the stress test, the rating of proposed change is discussed in turn. concerned that the sensitivity of the issuer of the instrument backing the Underwater Debt Coverage Ratio flag predicted monthly defaults to projected reserve account may be used, in lieu of (UWDCRF). In the Rule, the multifamily DCR falling below one may be too great, BBB, as the rating of the unrated seller- default model included an Underwater for two reasons. First, the UWDCRF is servicer, except that in no event will the Debt Coverage Ratio Flag (UWDCRF), an indicator that is only turned on when rating exceed AA. Determinations of the intended to cover the additional default DCR is projected to be below one, and required reserve amount and the rating risk posed when the projected debt is turned off otherwise. There are no permitted would be made on a program- service coverage ratio-net operating finer gradations for this explanatory by-program and Enterprise-by- income (NOI) divided by mortgage variable such as those that might be Enterprise basis. payment-falls below one during the captured if the projected DCR accounted B. Proposed Changes to Multifamily stress test. A debt coverage ratio less for individual property dispersion 14 Model around the mean. In the application of 13 The terms ‘‘benchmark region and period’’ refer OFHEO is proposing a number of to the regional credit loss experience identified by 14 In the Rule’s single-family default and changes to the multifamily default OFHEO in compliance with the ‘‘Credit Loss’’ prepayment models, the level of borrower equity in model, multifamily loss severity parameters outlined in Title XIII of the Housing and the property (property value less mortgage debt) is Community Development Act of 1992, Pub. L. No. analogous to multifamily DCR in that both measures parameters, and multifamily 102–550, known as the Federal Housing Enterprises capture economic stress. The circumstance of a prepayment speeds specified in the Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (1992 single-family mortgage borrower having negative Rule. Proposed changes to the default Act), as described in additional detail in NPR2. equity is similar to that of a multifamily loan having
VerDate 11
the stress test, many multifamily loan a cumulative default rate of 95 percent counterparts. Arguing against the groups will have DCRs projected to fall in the up-rate scenario. These excessive inclusion of an ARM flag is the below one—some only slightly below default rates for ARMs in the up-rate improvement in the Enterprises’ one, while others fall well below one. stress test arise from two principal multifamily ARM underwriting in The additional risk of default may be sources. First, the up-rate stress test recent years, which means that, over overstated for those loan groups with projects declining DCRs for ARMs, and time, differences in risk between loan DCRs projected to fall only slightly two explanatory variables in the default types due to differences in borrower below one by the abrupt transition of model translate declining DCRs into characteristics will disappear. That is, the UWDCRF variable. Second, even higher default rates: the DCR variable, the choice of ARM versus FRM in the when a multifamily property’s DCR itself, and the UWDCRF, where multifamily mortgage market may be does fall below one, only a fraction of applicable. The second source is from becoming a strategic business decision borrowers default, indicating that those the application of an ARM product-type related to professional financial who do not default may carry their flag—New Book ARM Flag (NAF)— management considerations and may, as properties with funds from other which further raises the predicted ARM a result, have a declining relationship to sources for a period of time while they default rates. OFHEO included the ARM borrower credit quality. try to remedy the negative cash flow product flag in the Rule because it OFHEO decided that the excessive position. observed in the historical data from the predicted default rates for ARM loans in For these reasons, OFHEO decided to Enterprises that ARM defaults appear to the up-rate stress test warranted re-estimate the multifamily default be higher than those of otherwise investigation of the default model’s model with a revised definition of the comparable FRMs even after controlling specification of ARM product type flags. UWDCRF that turns the flag on only for DCR changes due to interest rate OFHEO sought to determine if a when the DCR is projected to be well changes. respecification of the model could below one. As a result of that re- The stress test projects DCR in each maintain a reasonable relationship to estimation, OFHEO proposes to redefine month of the stress period from the the historical data while producing the UWDCRF to be equal to one (that is, prior month’s value using rent growth more reasonable results in the stress to turn the flag on) when projected DCR rates and vacancy rates that reflect the test. First, the estimation was performed is less than 0.98 (that is, when NOI is economic conditions of the benchmark without either of the two product type more than two percentage points below region and period along with monthly flags, the NAF and the New Book the mortgage payment), rather than mortgage payment adjustments Balloon Flag (NBLF). If the only setting the flag equal to one immediately according to the note terms and the additional risk associated with ARMs when the projected DCR falls below one. stress test interest rate scenarios. In the relative to FRMs resulted from the The re-estimated multifamily default up-rate scenario, the mortgage payment impact of rate changes on mortgage model has a slightly lower coefficient on adjustments on ARMs cause the payments and DCR, then this UWDCR, and the coefficients for the projected DCR to fall much more than specification for the default model other explanatory variables do not that of an otherwise comparable FRM. might be appropriate. OFHEO found, change materially. Simulations using This more rapid decline in DCR causes however, that this model specification the revised UWDCRF definition result predicted defaults on ARMs to be higher caused another explanatory variable, the in lower predicted default rates for than those of otherwise comparable Ratio Update Flag (RUF) to be no longer ARMs in the up-rate scenario and for FRMs, as one would expect, because statistically significant. Next, OFHEO FRMs with low initial DCR in both mortgage payments on an ARM may re-estimated the model without the scenarios, making the model less grow to exceed net operating income Ratio Update Flag. The result of the sensitive to the UWDCRF than the from the property. In addition, the NAF second re-estimation produced, as existing model. The revised definition further raises new book ARM defaults expected, an averaging effect between does not substantially affect the relative to comparable new book FRMs New Book ARM and FRM default predicted default rates for most FRMs or to capture performance differences not 15 rates—that is, the size of the coefficient for ARMs in the down-rate scenario. related to projected changes in DCR. for New Book loans decreased (the The theoretical justification for the OFHEO believes the respecified model coefficient remained negative but had a inclusion of an ARM flag to account for more accurately captures the added smaller absolute value), reflecting the performance differences not related to risks associated with loans that have fact that the NBF was now averaging the negative cash flow in the stress test. ARM payment changes is that ARM product type differences that are ARM Flags. OFHEO is concerned that borrowers may possess higher credit currently separated out by the product predicted cumulative default rates for risk qualities than their fixed-rate ARM loans are excessive in the up-rate type flags in the Rule. This specification also reduced the sensitivity of defaults scenario. For example, a typical ARM 15 The Rule includes a New Book ARM flag (NAF) purchased by an Enterprise could have and a New Book Balloon flag (NBLF) as product- to the distinction between New Book type offsets to the New Book flag (NBF), which is and Old Book loans, holding other a categorical (or dummy) variable that distinguishes factors constant, because it no longer a DCR below one because both are associated with between ‘‘Old Book’’ loans that were made when increased likelihood of default. However, in the the Enterprises first entered into the multifamily distinguished between loans for which single-family model, negative equity is captured as business (before 1988 for Fannie Mae and before loan-to-value ratio (LTV) and DCR ratios a probability and enters the model as categorical 1993 for Freddie Mac) and ‘‘New Book’’ loans made are updated and those for which they variable having eight possible values. These eight under their more recent restructured programs. are not.16 gradations for the probability of negative equity OFHEO’s research indicates that New Book loans improve the single-family model by avoiding abrupt have shown lower defaults than Old Book loans in predicted transitions from positive to negative general, although the amount of improvement 16 This effect is captured in the Rule by the Ratio equity. OFHEO is able to calculate the probability varies significantly among product types. Update Flag (RUF). Specifically, the RUF identifies of negative equity for single-family loans because Specifically, New Book fixed-rate balloon loans a subset of New Book loans—those for which the projected property value changes are based on outperformed Old Book fixed-rate balloon loans to loan-to-value ratio (LTV) and debt-service coverage OFHEO’s House Price Index and its associated a lesser degree than their fixed-rate fully amortizing ratio (DCR) have been calculated or delegated to dispersion parameters. No similar measures of counterparts. ARM loan performance differentials have been calculated by the Enterprises at loan dispersion are currently available to project were even smaller. These differences are reflected origination or for which the LTV and DCR have multifamily DCR or the probability of DCR falling in the Rule in the NBLF and NAF offsets to the been recalculated or delegated to have been below one. NBF. Continued
VerDate 11
OFHEO rejected the above model re- OFHEO believes that a similar The proposed change is to set the specification, which eliminates the distinction between ratio-updated FRMs initial vacancy rate at ten percent, NAF, the NBLF, and the RUF, because and not-ratio-updated FRMs should which is the estimated WSC Census it ignored two important factors that exist even though there are too few not- division vacancy rate in 1983. Thus, the OFHEO has observed in Enterprise ratio-updated FRMs in the Enterprises’ vacancy rate change in the initial month historical data. First, OFHEO considered historical data to confirm the of the stress test would be from ten the evidence of higher Enterprise ARM hypothesis. As a result, OFHEO percent to 13.6 percent. default rates, compared with FRM proposes to multiply monthly Loss Severity. Loss severity default rates during historical periods conditional default rates for not-ratio- parameters in the Rule were based upon when interest rates were flat to updated FRMs by a factor of 1.2 times the experience of 705 Freddie Mac declining. Since flat-to-declining the rates for otherwise comparable ratio- multifamily REO 19 properties from the interest rates lead to stable or lower updated FRMs to reflect the marginally 1980s. OFHEO has now analyzed data ARM payments and therefore stable or higher risk expected with those loans. reflecting the costs, timing, and recovery higher DCRs, all else equal, OFHEO OFHEO believes that, given the rates associated with additional REO suspected that factors unrelated to Enterprise data, the proposal handles a that has been made available from both interest-rate-related ARM payment very complicated issue fairly and with Enterprises. Based upon that analysis, changes (such as borrower credit statistical soundness and good OFHEO is proposing to modify the quality) may still be underlying the judgment. If, in the future, Enterprise multifamily severity parameters to take higher observed ARM default rates. data show no differences between ARM into consideration the performance of Second, OFHEO found substantial and FRM risk other than the adverse Fannie Mae REO in the 1980s and both differences in observed default rates for effect of rising interest rates on ARM Enterprises’ more recent multifamily ratio-updated versus not-ratio-updated payments and ARM DCR, OFHEO may REO. The multifamily loss severity loans in Enterprise historical data. revisit this issue. calculations that use the severity Ratio-updated loans appear to perform Initial Vacancy Rate. Estimated rent parameters in the Rule would not better than those that are not, holding growth for the first month of the stress change. Specifically, OFHEO proposes other factors constant. test is based on the relative change in a reducing net REO holding costs to seven Therefore, OFHEO proposes to re- rent index from immediately prior to the percent from 13.33 percent and specify its multifamily default model as stress test to month one of the stress increasing REO sales proceeds from follows. The proposed model has the test.17 However, the estimated vacancy 58.88 percent to 63 percent of the same explanatory variables as the model rate change in the first month of the unpaid principal balance as of the in the Rule, except that NAF, NBLF, and stress test does not look back to the default date. Additionally, OFHEO RUF are removed, and a respecified flag value of the vacancy rate immediately proposes reducing the time from default is introduced that captures both the prior to the stress test, but rather to foreclosure completion from 18 to 9 distinction between ARMs and FRMs compares the vacancy rate in month one months while increasing the time from and the distinction between ratio- of the stress test with a long-term REO acquisition to REO disposition updated and not-ratio-updated loans. national historical average vacancy rate. from 13 to 15 months. Changing these Specifically, the new variable OFHEO is To be consistent, the change in vacancy severity parameters yields a 44 percent proposing in its respecified default rates between the period immediately ‘‘baseline’’ severity rate, as compared to model is a Not-Ratio-updated ARM Flag prior to the stress test and month one of the 55 percent ‘‘baseline’’ produced by the model in the Rule. ‘‘Baseline’’ (NRAF) which takes a value of one (that the stress test should be based on the severity is a simple way to compare one is, it is turned on) if a loan is both an change in the benchmark region set of severity parameters with ARM and not ratio-updated, and zero vacancy rate from the month prior to the another.20 otherwise. Because nearly all of the benchmark period to the first month of Prepayment Penalties. In the Rule, no ARM loans in Enterprise historical data the benchmark period. OFHEO views credit is given for cash flows from are not ratio-updated, but nearly all of this change as a technical correction. prepayment penalties and yield the FRMs are ratio-updated, OFHEO Specifically, the vacancy rate change maintenance provisions. Nevertheless, determined that it is statistically in the Rule in the initial month of the the Rule provides that two percent of difficult to fully separate these effects as stress test is from the Census Bureau’s loans that are subject to such penalties measures of historical performance. The long-term national historical average of or provisions prepay each year of the proposed model with the NRAF variable 6.23 percent to the West South Central stress test in the down-rate scenario. In would apply this new variable (WSC) Census division’s estimated the preamble to the Rule, OFHEO coefficient during the stress test January, 1984, rate of 13.6 percent, with explained that the data indicated that a simulation only to ARM loans that are changes thereafter based upon changes small percentage of loans did prepay 18 not ratio-updated, capturing the in rates through 1993 in that region. while subject to yield maintenance historical performance differences of This specification has the effect of provisions and that OFHEO had no data these ARMs after controlling for imposing a greater percentage increase indicating to what extent prepayment payment changes. ARM loans that have in vacancies than appears to have penalties were actually paid by undergone the ratio-update process occurred during the benchmark loss borrowers, as opposed to waived by the would not be subject to higher default experience. Enterprises or added to the balances of risk imposed by the NRAF, thereby refinanced loans. Because it is likely reducing the differential between ARM 17 Specifically, the twelfth root of month over that some prepayment penalties are paid and FRM defaults in the up-rate same month previous year rent indices minus one. 18 Reporting of vacancy rate data for Metropolitan or other compensating consideration is scenario for those loans. Statistical Area located in the WSC Census division began in 1986. As a result, 1984 and 1985 rates 19 REO is real estate owned as a result of loan recalculated by the Enterprises at Enterprise were estimated based on national rates using the default. acquisition according to current underwriting ratio of WSC Census division rates to U.S. rental 20 The ‘‘baseline’’ consists of a simple adding up standards. New Book loans for which origination vacancy rates in 1986, a factor of 2.3. For 1983, a of the cost components of the rate, without and/or acquisition LTV and DCR are unknown lower factor of 1.8 is assumed because it predates considering discounting, credit enhancements, or cannot be considered to be ratio-updated. the WSC Census division’s recession. passthrough interest on sold loans.
VerDate 11
received by the Enterprises, OFHEO charged because many of the special status. It is reasonable, therefore, decided to include some prepayments Enterprises’ hedging instruments are to use a much smaller premium than on these loans in the down-rate based upon rates other than Treasuries might be appropriate for a non-GSE in scenario, but at a lower rate than (e.g., LIBOR, COFI). The spreads a similar stress test. OFHEO also indicated by the data in order to take between these rates and Treasuries considers it appropriate to consider that prepayment penalties into account. could be expected to widen during the stresses affecting the Enterprises in OFHEO is proposing to modify the stressful conditions, thus mitigating the the stress test would also be affecting Rule to provide for no prepayments in Enterprises’ risk. In light of these other borrowers in the market place. To the down-rate scenario inside comments, OFHEO postponed assume that they do not, as was the case prepayment penalty or yield imposition of any new debt premium in NPR2, which proposed a 50-basis- maintenance periods. This approach is pending later refinements of the Rule. point premium, is inconsistent with the more consistent with OFHEO’s Nevertheless, OFHEO indicated that the stress implied in the haircuts that the preference to model contractual implicit assumption in the stress test stress test applies to all counterparties instruments according to their terms, that the spreads of an Enterprise’s debt of the Enterprises. An ideal stress test but recognizes that modeling these yields to other interest rates would be might model different spreads for penalties according to their terms would unaffected by the deteriorating different interest rate series, a complex be immensely complicated, because condition of the Enterprise ignored an approach that OFHEO could not those terms vary greatly from loan to area of significant risk. implement in the foreseeable future. loan. The proposed approach is a The risk of wider spreads in a The ten-basis-point premium, therefore, reasonable simplification because stressful period is important if asset can be viewed as a simplifying prepayment penalty provisions are lives, which are unusually long in the assumption, which gives some effect to actually liquidated damages clauses, up-rate scenario, exceed terms-to- the possibility that stress period market which are intended to give the lender maturity of outstanding debt. In support conditions could impact an Enterprise the benefit of full performance on the of this proposal, OFHEO notes that more adversely than the rest of the loan. some funding strategies employed by market. the Enterprises depend significantly on C. Proposed Changes to Yields on their ability to borrow in the future at D. Proposed Changes to New Debt Mix Enterprise Debt relatively favorable interest rates. For The Rule provides for the funding of The Rule does not impose a premium example, the Enterprises often fund a all cash deficits by the issuance of new upon an Enterprise’s cost of funds to portion of their mortgage asset portfolio long-or short-term debt, whichever is in reflect the reaction of the debt markets with short-term debt accompanied by shorter supply, until a 50/50 balance of to the financial stress imposed upon the interest rate swaps, in which they pay short-to long-term debt is reached in Enterprise. However, the preamble to a fixed rate and receive a floating rate. each Enterprise’s portfolio. Thereafter, the Rule suggested that a premium If the floating rate they pay on their own long- and short-term debt are issued in might be appropriate and that this short-term debt is close to the floating whatever ratio best contributes to would likely be an area of future rate they receive on the swap, the net maintaining that balance. This approach change. Upon further study, OFHEO has effect is roughly the same as if they had was chosen because OFHEO did not found that it is appropriate for the stress issued long-term fixed-rate debt at the wish to include an assumption about test to recognize an increased cost of rate they pay on the swap. If, however, any particular behavioral preference by debt of ten basis points for an Enterprise their cost of short-term funds rises the Enterprises during the stress period. in the stress test vis-a-vis other significantly, relative to the index on On further consideration, however, borrowers in the debt markets. which the swap’s floating rate is based, OFHEO proposes to change the target OFHEO proposed in NPR2 to impose their cost will be higher than if they had balance embodied in this approach. A a 50-basis-point premium on new issued long-term fixed-rate debt. Use of 50/50 balance is generally unsuitable for Enterprise debt for the last nine years of fixed-pay swaptions to hedge against the funding a portfolio of largely fixed-rate the stress period. The analysis that effect of rising interest rates on expected mortgage assets, and it could often OFHEO performed for NPR2 indicated asset lives creates a similar risk. result in a substantial change in an that debt spreads to Treasury rates have Although the spreads to Treasury rates Enterprise’s funding structure during widened in times of financial stress for of other interests rates may also widen the stress period. OFHEO proposes to Government-sponsored enterprises in a stressful economic environment, replace the 50/50 target with the actual (GSEs). NPR2 did not propose the stress test is designed to be ratio of Enterprise debt obligations (as adjustments to reflect unusual stress for especially stressful to the Enterprises. adjusted by interest rate swaps) at the any other interest rate series in the The stress test involves factors, such as start of the stress period. Typically, the stress test. a decline in housing prices, that might Enterprises have a long-term debt to In the final rule, OFHEO took note of not affect the debt costs in other sectors total debt ratio (swap adjusted) of 70 the comments received in response to of the economy as much. OFHEO has percent to 90 percent. Use of such ratios NPR2, some of which questioned the chosen to propose a ten-basis-point in the stress test will result in a more appropriateness of a premium on new spread for the final nine years of the realistic debt structure. Enterprise debt and the size of that stress period, in part to reflect these E. Miscellaneous Technical Changes premium. OFHEO conceded that data risks. upon which to base such a premium A ten-basis-point borrowing premium Operating Expenses. In the Rule, one may be too sparse to determine incorporates these risks in a modest third of an Enterprise’s operating definitively whether other spreads to way. Firms in very stressful expenses at the start of the stress test Treasuries would widen as much as the circumstances frequently face premiums remain fixed throughout the stress Enterprises’ spreads or to estimate how of several hundred basis points, if they period, while the remainder decline in much the Enterprises’ spreads would are able to borrow at all. GSEs, though, proportion to the decline in the widen. The preamble to the final rule have always been able to borrow, even mortgage portfolio. The total of the fixed also noted that some commenters felt when they are in very poor financial and variable components is then that no premium on new debt should be condition, because of their perceived reduced by one-third to recognize that a
VerDate 11
cessation of new business would have a no haircut to foreign currency swaps, whether the proposed changes may raise significant impact upon operating but stated its intention to continue to novel policy issues. OFHEO is not expenses. The variable portion of the explore appropriate methodologies for required to provide the type of operating expenses for a given month is applying an appropriate haircut. In regulatory impact analysis that is determined by calculating the furtherance of its commitment to required for an economically significant Enterprise’s mortgage portfolio at the continue to refine the stress test, rule. Nevertheless, in accordance with end of each month of the stress period OFHEO now proposes to eliminate the OMB’s guidance that all regulatory as a percentage of the portfolio at the simplifying assumption and apply actions should be consistent with the start of the stress test. Starting-position haircuts to foreign currency swap principles of E.O. 12866, OFHEO has fixed-asset balances are held constant counterparties. Because the stress test determined, after review by agency over the ten-year stress period, while does not project foreign currency values, economists, financial analysts, and related depreciation is included in the the haircut is applied by adjusting the attorneys, that the benefits of the base on which operating expenses are pay (dollar-denominated) side of the proposed changes to the Rule calculated for each month of the stress swap upward by the amount of the substantially outweigh any economic period. The implication of this haircut percentage rather than costs. treatment is that fixed assets are being haircutting the foreign-currency receive It is impossible to estimate precisely regularly replaced throughout the side of the swap. the particular benefits and costs period, which appears inconsistent with American Call Option. As a associated with the risk-based capital the decline in financial assets as simplifying assumption in the Rule, an requirement. While OFHEO believes mortgages amortize and prepay. American call option, which allows the this group of enhancements and To address this inconsistency, issuer to exercise the option at any time, refinements to the stress test will not OFHEO is proposing to modify the is treated as a Bermudan call option, generally increase or decrease the stress test treatment of operating which allows the issuer to exercise the amount of required capital for an expenses by converting 75 percent of call only on a coupon date. However, in Enterprise to any substantial degree, the starting-position fixed-asset balances to the preamble to the Rule, OFHEO effect in any particular quarter depends cash over the ten-year stress period. The signaled its intention to consider how upon how well that Enterprise is hedged proposal would retain 25 percent of the American call options might be against the risks and conditions fixed assets on the Enterprise books modeled more precisely. OFHEO is now specified in the stress test. OFHEO throughout the stress period to reflect proposing to modify the stress test to cannot know whether or not hedges in the acquisition of some new fixed evaluate American calls on the first place at an Enterprise at the beginning assets, such as computer equipment, option date in the exercise schedule and of any quarter would have been in place which is likely even in a ‘‘wind-down’’ subsequent monthly anniversaries of the in the absence of specific provisions of scenario. The effect of this change is to instrument’s first coupon date. the risk-based capital rule or were put reduce the Enterprises’ need for debt to House Price Growth Factor in place because of the test. Speculating carry nonearning fixed assets. Clarification. The Rule requires the use as to what the Enterprises would do in Float Income. The Rule provides for of OFHEO’s most recent House Price the absence of specific provisions in the modeling of float income associated Index as of the reporting date to future quarters is even more difficult. with passthrough payments on determine the house price growth factor Therefore, a detailed economic cost/ securities issued by the Enterprises. used to calculate current loan-to-value benefit analysis is not practical. Float income can be positive or negative ratios. The proposal expands the Rather than trying to assess the costs depending on whether the Enterprise instructions in Section 3.6 to clarify, and benefits of every change to the holds the funds for a period of time consistent with Section 3.7, that when before remitting them to security stress test, OFHEO looks to whether or a loan was originated since the holders or remits funds to security not the changes it is proposing make the publication of that report, a cumulative holders before they are actually Rule better reflect the risks faced by the house price growth factor of one is used. received. When an Enterprise owns its Enterprises. Improving the Rule in this Technical Correction. The proposal manner should reduce the potential for own passthrough securities, the timing adds a Prepayment Penalty Flag as an of payment to itself is not relevant. Enterprise insolvency by protecting additional classification variable for However, the Rule includes these better against interest rate, credit, and multifamily loan groups, to distinguish securities in the calculation of float management and operations risk. By loans with active prepayment penalties income, resulting in an overstatement of helping to ensure the safety and or yield maintenance provisions from float income. OFHEO proposes to soundness of the Enterprises, the those without in the calculation of correct this overstatement by reducing regulation allows them to continue to prepayment penalty duration for loan the float income on passthrough carry out their public purposes, which groups. securities issued by the reporting include providing stability in the Enterprise by the percentage of the Regulatory Impact secondary market for residential Enterprise’s ownership interest. mortgages and providing access to However, when an Enterprise receives Executive Order 12866, Regulatory mortgage credit in central cities, rural prepayments and holds the funds for a Planning and Review areas, and underserved areas.21 In number of days during which investors The proposed amendment would addition, the regulation helps ensure accrue interest at the coupon rate of the amend a rule designated as a major rule that the Enterprises will continue to security, the difference between the by the Office of Management and provide benefits to the primary yield the Enterprise can earn on Budget (OMB). The proposed mortgage market, such as standardizing invested funds at that time of the stress amendment is a refinement of that rule business practices.22 period and the coupon rate will that would tie the capital more closely 21 continue to be reflected for the relevant to risk. Although the impact of that 1992 Act, section 1302(2) (12 U.S.C. 4501(2)). 22 ‘‘Managing Risk in Housing Finance Markets: number of days. refinement is not economically Perspective from the Experience of the United Currency Swaps. As a simplifying significant, OMB has reviewed the States of America and Mexico,’’ Mortgage Bankers assumption in the Rule, OFHEO applied proposed amendment to determine Association of America (June 11, 1998).
VerDate 11
Adopting the proposed amendment impact on small entities. Such an n. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.5.3.2 [a] will result in a capital requirement that analysis need not be undertaken if the 2.b.; corresponds more closely to capital agency has certified that the regulation o. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.5.3.2 [a] 3.; levels that the marketplace would will not have a significant economic p. Revise Table 3–44, in paragraph demand in the absence of the benefits impact on a substantial number of small 3.6.3.6.3.2; afforded by the Government entities. 5 U.S.C. 605(b). OFHEO has q. In section 3.6.3.6.4.3, revise the sponsorship of the Enterprises, leading considered the impact of the proposed four paragraphs: [a] 1., [a] 3.b., [a] 4.b. to gains in overall economic efficiency. regulation under the Regulatory and [a] 5.; By improving the Rule’s ability to reflect Flexibility Act. The General Counsel of r. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.7.3 [a] 9.b.; actual risks at the Enterprises, the OFHEO certifies that the proposed s. Revise paragraph 3.7.3.1 [g] 1.; amendment also may enhance investor regulation, if adopted, is not likely to t. In paragraphs 3.7.3.2 [a] 5. and confidence in the ability of the stress have a significant economic impact on 3.7.3.3 [a] 3., add the words ‘‘, as test to forewarn investors and regulators a substantial number of small business appropriate’’ at the end of the sentence of financial weaknesses. This result entities because the regulation is in each paragraph; would be consistent with a study by applicable only to the Enterprises, u. In paragraph 3.7.4 [a] remove Standard & Poor’s (S&P) that provided which are not small entities for reference to ‘‘Table 3–55’’ and add risk-to-the-government credit ratings for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility ‘‘Table 3–61’’ in its place; 23 the Enterprises. Although S&P had Act. v. Redesignate Tables 3–65 through 3– rated Fannie Mae A- and Freddie Mac 70 as Tables 3–66 through 3–71; A+ in 1991, the 1997 report upgraded List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 1750 w. After paragraph 3.8.1 [e], add new the ratings of both Enterprises to AA-. Capital classification, Mortgages, paragraph 3.8.1 [f], new footnote 5, and S&P cited increased governmental Risk-based capital. new Table 3–65; oversight by OFHEO as an important Accordingly, for the reasons stated in x. In paragraphs 3.8.2 [a] and [b] factor in these higher ratings. It further the preamble, OFHEO proposes to remove references to ‘‘Table 3–65’’ and noted that ‘‘OFHEO’s regulatory amend 12 CFR part 1750 as follows: add ‘‘Table 3–66’’ in their place; oversight [of Freddie Mac] also gives comfort that appropriate interest rate PART 1750—RISK-BASED CAPITAL y. Revise paragraph 3.8.3.1 [a] 3.a.; risk mitigation steps would be taken as z. In paragraph 3.8.3.4 remove 1. The authority citation for part 1750 needed.’’24 reference to ‘‘Table 3–66’’ and add OFHEO can identify no significant continues to read as follows: ‘‘Table 3–67’’ in its place; costs associated with implementing the Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4513, 4514, 4611, aa. In paragraphs 3.8.3.6.1 [e] 1. and proposed amendments. No new reports 4612, 4614, 4618. [e] 2. remove both references to ‘‘Table are required, and net effects on required 2. Amend Appendix A to subpart B of 3–67’’ and add ‘‘Table 3–68’’ in their capital likely will be very small. In sum, part 1750 as follows: place; the benefits to the public, including the a. Revise Table 3–1 in paragraph bb. In redesignated Table 3–69 in Enterprises and other private-sector 3.1.1; paragraph 3.8.3.9, remove both concerns, of the proposed changes far b. Revise Table 3–4 in paragraph references to ‘‘Table 3–65’’ and add outweigh the already expended costs of 3.1.2.1; ‘‘Table 3–66’’ in their place; implementing those changes. c. Revise paragraph 3.3.1 [b]; cc. Revise paragraphs 3.8.3.10 [a], [b] d. Revise paragraph 3.3.3 [a] 3.c.; and [c]; Paperwork Reduction Act e. Add new paragraph 3.5.3 [a] 2.d.; dd. In paragraph 3.9.2 remove This proposed regulation does not f. Revise paragraph 3.5.3 [a] 3. and reference to ‘‘Table 3–69’’ and add contain any information collection Table 3–31; ‘‘Table 3–70’’ in its place; requirements that require the approval g. In sentence six of paragraph 3.6.1 ee. In paragraph 3.10.2 [a] remove of the Office of Management and Budget [e], remove the comma after the words reference to ‘‘Table 3–70’’ and add under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 ‘‘Credit Losses’’, add the word ‘‘and’’ in ‘‘Table 3–71’’ in its place; U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). its place, and remove the words ‘‘and ff. Revise paragraphs 3.10.3.1 [b] 2. the Float Income’’ after the words Regulatory Flexibility Act and [b] 3.; ‘‘Guarantee Fee’’; gg. Revise paragraph 3.10.3.6.2 [a] 5.; h. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.4.3.1 [a] 2.a.; The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 and U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires that a i. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.5.1 [b]; j. In paragraph 3.6.3.5.2, revise Table hh. Revise the definition of Enterprise regulation that has a significant Cost of Funds in paragraph 4.0 Glossary. economic impact on a substantial 3–38; k. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.5.3.1 [a] 2.; The revisions and additions read as number of small entities, small follows: businesses, or small organizations must l. In paragraph 3.6.3.5.3.1 [a] 4, include an initial regulatory flexibility remove the first equation: ‘‘UWDCRFm = Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 1750— analysis describing the regulation’s 1 if DCRm < 1 in month m’’ and add the Risk-Based Capital Text Methodology equation ‘‘UWDCRFm = 1 if DCRm < 0.98 and Specifications 23 in month m’’ in its place; Final Report of Standard & Poor’s to OFHEO, * * * * * Contract No. HE09602C (February 3, 1997). m. Revise paragraph 3.6.3.5.3.2 [a] 1. 24 Contract No. HE09602C, at 10. and Table 3–39; 3.1.2.1 * * *
VerDate 11
TABLE 3–1-SOURCES OF STRESS TEST INPUT DATA
Data Source(s) R = RBC Report P = Public Data Section of this Appendix Table F = Fixed Values R P F Intermediate Outputs
3.1.3, Public Data 3–19, Stress Test Single Family Quarterly F House Price Growth Rates
3–20, Multifamily Monthly Rent Growth and Va- F cancy Rates
3.2.2., Commitments Inputs Characteristics of securitized single family loans R 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs originated and delivered within 6 months prior to the Start of the Stress Test
3.2.3., Commitments Procedures 3–25, Monthly Deliveries as a Percentage of F Commitments Outstanding (MDP)
3.3.2, Interest Rates Inputs 3–18, Interest Rate and Index Inputs P
3.3.3, Interest Rates Procedures 3–26, CMT Ratios to the Ten-Year CMT F
3.4.2., Property Valuation Inputs 3–28, Property Valuation Inputs 3.1.3, Public Data 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs
3.5.3., Counterparty Defaults Procedures 3–30, Rating Agencies Mappings to OFHEO P Ratings Categories
3–31, Stress Test Maximum Haircut by Ratings F Classification
3.6.3.3.2, Mortgage Amortization Schedule In- 3–32, Loan Group Inputs for Mortgage Amorti- 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs puts zation Calculation
3.6.3.4.2, Single Family Default and Prepayment 3–34, Single Family Default and Prepayment R F 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- Inputs Inputs puts
3.6.3.4.3.2, Prepayment and Default Rates and 3–35, Coefficients for Single Family Default and F Performance Fractions Prepayment Explanatory Variables
3.6.3.5.2, Multifamily Default and Prepayment 3–38, Loan Group Inputs for Multifamily Default RF Inputs and Prepayment Calculations
3.6.3.5.3.2, Default and Prepayment Rates and 3–39, Explanatory Variable Coefficients for Mul- F 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- Performance Fractions tifamily Default puts
3.6.3.6.2.2, Single Family Gross Loss Severity 3–42, Loan Group Inputs for Gross Loss Sever- F 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs Inputs ity 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- puts 3.6.3.4.4, Single Family Default and Prepay- ment Outputs
3.6.3.6.3.2, Multifamily Gross Loss Severity In- 3–44, Loan Group Inputs for Multifamily Gross F 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs puts Loss Severity 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- puts
3.6.3.6.4.2, Mortgage Credit Enhancement In- 3–46, CE Inputs for each Loan Group R 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- puts puts 3.6.3.4.4, Single Family Default and Prepay- ment Outputs 3.6.3.5.4, Multifamily Default and Prepayment Outputs 3.6.3.6.2.4, Single Family Gross Loss Severity Outputs 3.6.3.6.3.4, Multifamily Gross Loss Severity Outputs
3–47, Inputs for each Distinct CE Combination R (DCC)
3.6.3.7.2, Stress Test Whole Loan Cash Flow 3–51, Inputs for Final Calculation of Stress Test R 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs Inputs Whole Loan Cash Flows 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Out- puts 3.6.3.4.4, Single Family Default and Prepay- ment Outputs 3.6.3.5.4, Multifamily Default and Prepayment Outputs 3.6.3.6.5.2, Single Family and Multifamily Net Loss Severity Outputs
3.6.3.8.2, Whole Loan Accounting Flows Inputs 3–54, Inputs for Whole Loan Accounting Flows R 3.6.3.7.4, Stress Test Whole Loan Cash Flow Outputs
VerDate 11
TABLE 3–1-SOURCES OF STRESS TEST INPUT DATA—Continued
Data Source(s) R = RBC Report P = Public Data Section of this Appendix Table F = Fixed Values R P F Intermediate Outputs
3.7.2., Mortgage-Related Securities Inputs 3–56, RBC Report Inputs for Single Class MBS R Cash Flows 3–57, RBC Report Inputs for Multi-Class and R Derivative MBS Cash Flows 3–58, RBC Report Inputs for MRBs and Deriva- R tive MBS Cash Flows 3.8.2., Nonmortgage Instrument Inputs 3–66, Input Variables for Nonmortgage Instru- R ment Cash flows 3.9.2., Alternative Modeling Treatments Inputs 3–70, Alternative Modeling Treatment Inputs R
3.10.2., Operations, Taxes, and Accounting In- 3–71, Operations, Taxes, and Accounting In- R 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs puts puts 3.6.3.7.4, Stress Test Whole Loan Cash Flow Outputs 3.7.4., Mortgage-Related Securities Outputs 3.8.4., Nonmortgage Instrument Outputs
3.12.2., Risk-Based Capital Requirement Inputs R 3.3.4, Interest Rates Outputs 3.9.4., Alternative Modeling Treatments Outputs 3.10.4., Operations, Taxes, and Accounting Outputs
* * * * * 3.1.2.1 * * * TABLE 3–4.—ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY LOAN CLASSIFICATION VARIABLES
Variable Description Range
Multifamily Product Code Identifies the mortgage product types for multifamily Fixed Rate Fully Amortizing loans Adjustable Rate Fully Amortizing 5 Year Fixed Rate Balloon 7 Year Fixed Rate Balloon 10 Year Fixed Rate Balloon 15 Year Fixed Rate Balloon Balloon ARM Other
New Book Flag ’’New Book’’ is applied to Fannie Mae loans acquired New Book beginning in 1988 and Freddie Mac loans acquired Old Book beginning in 1993, except for loans that were refi- nanced to avoid a default on a loan originated or acquired earlier.
Ratio Update Flag Indicates if the LTV and DCR were updated at origi- Yes nation or at Enterprise acquisition No
Interest Only Flag Indicates if the loan is currently paying interest only. Yes Loans that started as I/Os and are currently amor- No tizing should be flagged as ‘N’.
Current DCR Assigned classes for the Debt Service Coverage DCR < 1.00 Ratio based on the most recent annual operating 1.00 <=DCR<1.10 statement 1.10 <=DCR<1.20 1.20 <=DCR<1.30 1.30 <=DCR<1.40 1.40 <=DCR<1.50 1.50 <=DCR<1.60 1.60 <=DCR<1.70 1.70 <=DCR<1.80 1.80 <=DCR<1.90 1.90 <=DCR<2.00 2.00 <=DCR<2.50 2.50 <=DCR<4.00 DCR >= 4.00
Prepayment Penalty Flag Indicates if prepayment of the loan is subject to ac- Yes tive prepayment penalties or yield maintenance No provisions
* * * * * 3.3.1 * * * second, project the ten-year CMT for each [b] The process for determining interest month of the Stress Period as specified in the rates is as follows: first, identify values for 1992 Act; third, project the 1-month Treasury the necessary Interest Rates at time zero; yield, the 3-month, 6-month, 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, 20-
VerDate 11
and 30-year CMTs; fourth, project non- servicer who participates in a delegated 100 percent for Below BBB and Unrated. Treasury Interest Rates, including the Federal underwriting and servicing program that For non-derivative counterparties, the Agency Cost of Funds Index; and fifth, requires a loss-sharing agreement when: loss severity rate is 70 percent; for project the Enterprises Cost of Funds Index, (1) The loss sharing agreement is derivative counterparties, it is 10 which provides borrowing rates for the collateralized by a fully funded reserve percent. For all Below BBB and Unrated Enterprises during the Stress Period, by account pledged to the Enterprise; and counterparties, the loss severity rate is increasing the Agency Cost of Funds Index (2) the reserve account is in an amount 100 percent. by 10 basis points for the last 108 months of that is equal to or exceeds the amount b. For periods prior to the implementation the Stress Test. that OFHEO has determined to be of netting, a separate set of Maximum * * * * * adequate to support the seller-servicer’s Haircuts (set forth in Table 3–31) will be loss-sharing obligation under the applied to derivative contract cash flows 3.3.3 * * * program. Determinations of the reserve to approximate the impact of the net [a] * * * requirement and of the rating that will be exposures to derivative contract 3. * * * permitted will be made on a program-by- counterparties (see section 3.8.3, c. Enterprise Borrowing Rates. In the Stress program and Enterprise-by-Enterprise Nonmortgage Instrument Procedures). Test, the Federal Agency Cost of Funds basis by the Director. Index is the same as the Enterprise Cost 3. Determine Maximum Haircuts. The Stress After the implementation of netting, of Funds Index during the Stress Period, Test specifies the Maximum Haircut (i.e., exposures will be netted as described in except that the Stress Test adds a 10 the maximum reduction applied to cash section 3.8.3 before the haircut is basis-point credit spread to the Federal flows during the Stress Test to reflect the applied. Agency Cost of Funds rates to project risk of loss due to counterparty c. With the exception of haircuts for the Enterprise Cost of Funds rates for the last (including security) default) by rating Below BBB and Unrated category, 108 months of the Stress Period. category and counterparty type as shown haircuts for all counterparty categories * * * * * in Table 3–31. are phased-in linearly over the 120 a. The Maximum Haircut for a rating months of the Stress Period. The 3.5.3 * * * category is the product of its default rate Maximum Haircut is applied in month [a] * * * and its loss severity rate. For all 120 of the Stress Period. Haircuts for the 2. * * * counterparties the default rates are 5 Below BBB and Unrated category are d. The Stress Test will permit a higher percent for AAA, 12.5 percent for AA, 20 applied fully starting in the first month rating to be used for an unrated seller- percent for A, 40 percent for BBB and of the Stress Test. TABLE 3–31.—STRESS TEST MAXIMUM HAIRCUT BY RATINGS CLASSIFICATION
Derivative Derivative Contract Contract Non-Derivative Counterparties Counterparties Contract Number of Ratings Classification prior to Imple- after Imple- Counterparties Phase-in mentation of mentation of or Instruments Months Netting Netting
Cash 0% 0% 0% N/A
AAA 0.3% 0.5% 3.5% 120
AA 0.75% 1.25% 8.75% 120
A 1.2% 2% 14% 120
BBB 2.4% 4% 28% 120
Below BBB and Unrated 100% 100% 100% 1
* * * * * Stress Test using House Price Growth Factors specified in the equations section 3.6.3.5.3.1, from the Benchmark region and time period: 3.6.3.4.3.1 * * * of this Appendix, to determine Default rates for multifamily loans: Mortgage Age, [a] * * * LTV= LTV Mortgage Age Squared, New Book indicator, 2. * * * q ORIG Not Ratio-updated ARM indicator, current a. LTV is evaluated for a quarter q as: q UPB =− Debt-Service Coverage Ratio, Underwater mq33 Ratio of current UPB Current Debt-Service Coverage indicator, × ORIG Loan-To-Value Ratio at origination/ q acquisition, and a Balloon Maturity indicator. Loan Group UPB LG CHPGF× exp∑ HPGR Regression coefficients (weights) are to Original UPB 0 k LTV × k=1 associated with each variable. All of this ORIG information is used to compute conditional Ratio of current property Where: annual Default rates throughout the Stress value (based on HPI in UPBm=3q-3 = UPB for the month at the end of the quarter prior to quarter q Test. The annualized Default rates are converted to monthly conditional Default quarter q) to original CHPGFoLG= 1.0 if the loan was originated in the same quarter as or after the most rates and are used together with monthly property value (based on recently available HPI as of the reporting conditional Prepayment rates to calculate HPI at Origination) date Stress Test Whole Loan Cash Flows. (See * * * * * section 3.6.3.7, Stress Test Whole Loan Cash The HPI at Origination is updated to the Flows, of this appendix). 3.6.3.5.1 beginning of the Stress Test using actual * * * * * historical experience as measured by the [b] Explanatory Variables for Default Rates. OFHEO HPI; and then updated within the Eight explanatory variables are used as 3.6.3.5.2
VerDate 11
TABLE 3-38—LOAN GROUP INPUTS FOR MULTIFAMILY DEFAULT AND PREPAYMENT CALCULATIONS
Variable Description Source
Mortgage Product Type RBC Report
A0 Age immediately prior to start of Stress Test, in months (weighted average for Loan Group) RBC Report
NBF New Book Flag RBC Report
RUF Ratio Update Flag RBC Report
LTVORIG Loan-to-Value ratio at loan Origination RBC Report
DCR0 Debt Service Coverage Ratio at the start of the Stress Test RBC Report
PMT0 Amount of the mortgage Payment (principal and interest) prior to the start of the Stress RBC Report Test, or first Payment for new loans (aggregate for Loan Group)
PPEM Prepayment Penalty End Month number in the Stress Test (weighted average for Loan RBC Report Group)
RM Remaining term to Maturity in months (i.e., number of contractual payments due between RBC Report the start of the Stress Test and the contractual maturity date of the loan) (weighted aver- age for Loan Group)
RGRm Benchmark Rent Growth for months m = 1 120 of the Stress Test section 3.4.4, Property Valuation Outputs
RVRm Benchmark Vacancy Rates for months m = 1 120 of the Stress Test section 3.4.4, Property Valuation Outputs
PMTm Scheduled Payment for months m = 1 RM 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Outputs
OE Operating expenses as a share of gross potential rents (0.472) fixed decimal from Benchmark region and time period
RVRo Initial rental vacancy rate 0.10
* * * * * coefficients from Table 3–39. For TABLE 3–39—EXPLANATORY VARIABLE indexing purposes, the Default rate for a 3.6.3.5.3.1 * * * COEFFICIENTS FOR MULTIFAMILY DE- period m is the likelihood of missing the [a] * * * mth payment; calculate its corresponding FAULT—Continued 2. Assign product and ratio update flags logit (Xδ ) based on Loan Group m Explanatory Variable Default Weight (δv) (NBF, NRAF). Note: these values do not characteristics as of the period prior to change over time for a given Loan Group. m, i.e. prior to making the mth payment. UWDCRF 1.220 a. New Book Flag (NBF): δδ=+ δ 2 LTV 0.8165 NBF = 1 for Fannie Mae loans acquired after XAYAYmAYm−−1 2 m 1 1987 and Freddie Mac loans acquired after AY ++δδ BMF 1.518 1992, except for loans that were refinanced NBFNBF NRAF NRAF to avoid a Default on a loan originated or + δ Intercept (δ0) ¥4.553 acquired earlier. DCRln()DCR m−1 NBF = 0 otherwise. + δ * * * * * UWDCRFUWDCRF m−1 b. Not Ratio-updated Arm Flag (NRAF): 2. * * * NRAF = 1 if both ARMF = 1 and RUF = 0, + δ ln()LTV b. For the down-rate scenario, APRm = 0 NRAF = 0 otherwise. LTV ORIG ++δδ percent during the Prepayment penalty Where: BMFBMF m−10 period (i.e., when m ≤ PPEM) ARMF = 1 for ARMs (including Balloon APRm = 25 percent after the Prepayment ARMs) TABLE 3–39—EXPLANATORY VARIABLE penalty period (i.e., when m > PPEM) ARMF = 0 otherwise, and COEFFICIENTS FOR MULTIFAMILY DE- * * * * * RUF = 1 if the LTV and DCR were calculated 3. Convert annual Prepayment and Default or delegated to have been calculated at FAULT rates to monthly rates (MPR and MDR) origination or recalculated or delegated to Explanatory Variable Default Weight (δv) have been recalculated at Enterprise using the following formulas for acquisition according to current Enterprise AY 0.5256 simultaneous processes: standards. ¥ APR RUF = 0 otherwise AY2 0.0284 MPR = m m + * * * * * NBF ¥1.219 ADRmm APR 3.6.3.5.3.2 * * * 1 NRAF 0.4193 ×−− − [a] * * * 1() 1 ADRmm APR 12 ¥ 1. Compute the logits for multifamily Default DCR 2.368 using inputs from Table 3–38 and If both ARMF = 0 and RUF = 0, then
VerDate 11
ADR ADR 3.6.3.6.3.2 * * * MDR = m MDR = m m + m + ADRmm APR ADRmm APR 1 1 ×−−11()ADR − APR 12 ×−− 1() 1 ADR − APR 12 mm mm ×12. * * * * * otherwise, TABLE 3–44—LOAN GROUP INPUTS FOR MULTIFAMILY GROSS LOSS SEVERITY
Variable Description Value or Source
Government Flag RBC Report
DRm Discount Rate in month m (decimal per annum) 6-month Enterprise Cost of Funds from Sec- tion 3.3, Interest Rates
MQ Time during which delinquent loan interest is passed-through to MBS holders 4 for sold loans 0 otherwise
PTRm Pass Through Rate applicable to payment due in month m (decimal per annum) section 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Outputs
NYRm Net Yield Rate applicable to payment due in month m (decimal per annum) section 3.6.3.3.4, Mortgage Amortization Schedule Outputs
RHC Net REO holding costs as a decimal fraction of Defaulted UPB 0.07
MF Time from Default to completion of foreclosure (REO acquisition) 9 months
MR Months from REO acquisition to REO disposition 15 months
RP REO proceeds as a decimal fraction of Defaulted UPB 0.63
* * * * * Where: Where: 3.6.3.6.4.3 * * * m′ = m, except for counterparties rated below m′ = m, except for counterparties rated below ′ [a] * * * BBB, where m’ = 120 BBB, where m = 120 * * * * * 1. Determine Mortgage Insurance Payment MIExpLG = 1 if (MIm) for single family loans in the DCC, m 4.*** or Loss Sharing Payment (LSA ) for m UPBLG b. Determine CE Payment in Dollars after multifamily loans in the DCC, as a LTV × m < 078. application of Haircuts: percentage of Defaulted UPB, applying ORIG LG UPBORIG appropriate counterparty Haircuts from PDDCC,, C22 H = PDDCC , C section 3.5, of this Appendix: LG = m m MIExpm 0 otherwise m′ DCC, C2 MIDCC =−()1 MIExpLG 0.78 (78%)= the LTV at which MI is ×− 1 × MaxHct() R m m 120 cancelled if payments are ××MI,, DCC MI LG current Where: C CLMm m′ = m, except for counterparties rated below m′ MI, DCC * * * * * ′ ×−1 × MaxHct() R BBB, where m = 120 120 3.*** b. Determine CE Payment in Dollars after * * * * * application of Haircuts: 5. Convert Aggregate Limit First and Second Priority Contract receipts in Dollars for LSADCC=× C LSA,, DCC CLMLSA LG PDDCC,, C11 H = PDDCC , C each DCC in month m to a percentage of m m m m DCC Defaulted UPB: m′ LSA, DCC m′ DCC, C1 ×− 1 × MaxHct() R ×− 1 × MaxHct() R 120 120
DCC,, C1122 H× DCC , C +×DCC , C , H DCC , C ()PDm ELPI() PDm ELPI ALPDDCC = m ××LG DCC DEFmm UPB−1 P
VerDate 11
Where: Prepayment Interest Shortfall (PIS) in month 1. Compute: ELPIDCC,C = 0 if ELPFDCC,C = Y (Yes, m is: m′ indicating that Contract C is an Enterprise HctFac = × MaxHct() R Loss Position) PTRm m PIS=×× UPB− PRE 120 DCC,C mm1 m ELPI = 1 otherwise 12 Where: * * * * * −××FERm m’ = m, except for MBS credit rating below 3.6.3.7.3. * * * FREP PPRm BBB where m’=120 12 R = MBS credit rating [a] * * * ≥ if FDP 30 * * * * * 9. * * * b. Float Income (FI) received in month m PTRm 3.8.1 * * * PIS=×× UPB− PRE mm1 m24 [f] In a currency swap, the Enterprise receives payments that are denominated in a FI=+−[([( SPR NIR GF ) FER mmmm −×× FREP PPR m foreign currency and it makes payments in m U.S. dollars. The main difference between 24 × FDS +× FDP currency swaps and the type of swaps PPRm if 15 ≤< FDP 30 365 365 discussed above is that in a currency swap * * * * * principal amounts are actually exchanged ××− FER ()1 FREP]− PIS between the two counterparties. Currency m m 3.7.3.1 * * * swaps are divided into two classes, as shown Where: [g] * * * in Table 3–65 below.5 TABLE 3–65—CURRENCY SWAP CONTRACT CLASSIFICATION
Classification Description of Contract
Fixed-for-Fixed Currency Swap Enterprise receives fixed interest payments denominated in a foreign currency and makes fixed, US$-de- nominated payments
Fixed-for Floating Currency Swap Enterprise receives fixed interest payments denominated in a foreign currency and makes payments in US$ based on a floating interest rate
* * * * * of the debt and the swap creates synthetic month. New short-term debt issued is six- debt with principal and interest payments 3.8.3.1 * * * month discount notes with a discount rate denominated in U.S. dollars. The Haircuts for at the six-month Enterprise Cost of Funds [a] * * * currency swaps are applied to the pay as specified in section 3.3, Interest Rates, 3. When applying the option exercise rule: (dollar-denominated) side of the currency of this Appendix, with interest accruing on a. For zero coupon and discount securities, swaps, or to the cash outflows of the a 30/360 basis. New long-term debt issued instruments with European options, and synthetic debt instrument. Therefore, the is five-year bonds not callable for the first zero coupon swaps, evaluate option payments made by the Enterprise on a year (‘‘five-year-no call-one’’) with an exercise only on dates listed in the foreign currency contract are increased by the American call at par after the end of the instrument’s option exercise schedule. haircut amount. The Haircuts and the Phase- first year, semiannual coupons on a 30/360 For Bermudan options, evaluate option in periods for currency swaps are detailed in basis with principal paid at maturity or exercise on the first option date in the Table 3–31, under Derivative Contracts. call, and a coupon rate set at the five year instrument’s option exercise schedule [c] Haircuts for swaps that are not foreign and subsequent coupon dates (coupon Enterprise Cost of Funds as specified in currency related are applied to the Monthly section 3.3, Interest Rates, of this dates on the fixed-rate leg for swaps). For Interest Accruals (as calculated in section Appendix, plus a 50 basis point premium American options, evaluate option 3.8.3.8, of this Appendix) on the receive leg for the call option. An issuance cost of 2.5 exercise on the first option date in the minus the Monthly Interest Accruals on the instrument’s option exercise schedule pay leg when this difference is positive. Use basis points is assessed on new short-term and subsequent monthly anniversaries of the maximum haircut from Table 3–31 for debt at issue and an issuance cost of 20 the instrument’s first coupon date. periods before and after the implementation basis points is assessed on new long-term debt at issue. New long-term debt is issued * * * * * of netting, as appropriate. After the implementation of netting, net the swap to target a total debt mix of short to long 3.8.3.10 * * * proceeds for each counterparty before term debt that is the same as the short to [a] Finally, the interest and principal cash applying the haircuts. The following example long term debt mix at the beginning of the flows received by the Enterprises for non- applies to an Enterprise having two swaps Stress Test. Issuance fees for new debt are mortgage instruments other than swaps and with the same counterparty. On the first amortized on a straight line basis to the foreign currency-related instruments are swap, the Enterprise pays fixed and receives maturity of the appropriate instrument. Haircut (i.e., reduced) by a percentage to floating and on the second swap it pays 3. Given the Net Cash Deficit (NCDm) in account for the risk of counterparty floating and receives fixed. If the month m, use the following constants insolvency, if a counterparty obligation counterparty is a net payer to the Enterprise, and method to calculate the amount of exists. The amount of the Haircut is the haircuts will be applied to the sum of the short-term and long-term debt to issue in calculated based on the public rating of the two receive legs net of the sum of the two pay month m: counterparty and time during the stress legs. a. Set the Issuance Cost on new short-term period in which the cash flow occurs, as * * * * * debt at issue (ISCOST): specified in section 3.5, Counterparty ISCOST = 0.00025 Defaults, of this Appendix. 3.10.3.1 * * * b. Set the Issuance Cost on new long-term [b] An Enterprise may issue debt [b] * * * debt at issue (ILCOST): denominated in, or indexed to, foreign 2. In any month in which the cash position ILCOST = 0.002 currencies, and eliminate the resulting is negative at the end of the month, the c. Calculate Net Short-term Debt foreign currency exposure by entering into Stress Test issues a mix of new short-term Outstanding (NSDO0) and Total Debt currency swap agreements. The combination and long-term debt on the 15th day of that Outstanding (TDO0) at the start of the
5 Ibid.
VerDate 11
Stress Test (m = 0) using the following (3) Calculate TDOm by summing PBm,i for g. Calculate the Adjustment Factor for methodology: instruments where MNRm,i is greater Long-Term Debt Issuance Fees (AFLIFm): (1) For each month m and each debt and than m. swap instrument i (each swap leg is d. Set the Maximum Proportion of Total 1 AFLIF = considered a separate instrument), Debt (MPD): m − determine the Month of Next Repricing 1 ILCOST TDO− NSDO h. Calculate the Maximum Long-Term (MNRm) defined as the first month = 00 greater than m in which the instrument MPD Issuance (MLTIm): TDO0 matures, an option is exercised, or =× repricing can occur whether or not the e. Calculate Discount Rate Factor (DRFm): MLTImm NCD AFLIF m coupon rate actually changes. Set the i. Calculate Net Short-Term Debt 6 Principal Balance (PBm) to be: CF Outstanding (NSDOm) and Total Debt DRF =+1 m (a) the principal (or notional principal) m Outstanding (TDOm) for month m using outstanding if the instrument cash flows 12 the methodology described in section are paid by the Enterprise, Where: CFm = six month Enterprise Cost of 3.c. of this section. Note: This (b) minus the principal (or notional Funds for month m calculation must reflect all new principal) outstanding if the instrument f. Calculate the Adjustment Factor for issuances, option exercises, and cash flows are received by the Short-Term Debt Issuance Fees (AFSIFm): maturities between the beginning of the Enterprise. Stress Test and month m. (2) Calculate NSDO by summing PB for DRF j. Calculate Interim Face Amount of Long- m m,i AFSIF = m all instruments where MNRm,i is less m 1−×ISCOST DRF Term Debt to be issued this month than or equal to m plus 12. m (IFALDm):
()()MPD−1 × TDO++×× NSDO() MPD AFSIF NCD IFALD = mm mm m −+ ×MPD 1 MPD AFSIFm AFLIFm
k. Calculate Face Amount of Long-Term Debt to be issued (FALDm): = FALDmmmin ()MLTIm ,, max ()0 IFALD
l. Calculate Face Amount of Short-Term Debt to be issued (FASDm): =× −FALDm FASDmm AFSIF max 0, NCDm AFLIFm
* * * * * DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Housing and Urban Development, 451 3.10.3.6.2*** URBAN DEVELOPMENT Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410, telephone 202–708–3976 (this is [a]*** 24 CFR Parts 5 and 202 5. Fixed Assets. 25 percent of fixed assets not a toll-free number). For general (net of accumulated depreciation) as of [Docket No. FR–4681–C–02] information about this notice and the the beginning of the Stress Test remain proposed rule, Stacey Kniff, Real Estate constant over the Stress Test. The Uniform Financial Reporting Assessment Center, U.S. Department of remaining 75 percent is converted to StandardsFor HUD Housing Programs, Housing and Urban Development, 1280 cash on a straight line basis over the ten- Additional Entity Filing Requirements; Maryland Avenue, SW., Suite 800, year Stress Period. Depreciation is Correction Washington, DC 20024, telephone included in the base on which operating AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, Technical Assistance Center, 1–888– expenses are calculated for each month HUD. 245–4860 (this is a toll-free number). during the Stress Period. ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. Persons with hearing or speech * * * * * impairments may access these 4.0*** SUMMARY: On November 30, 2001, HUD telephone numbers via TTY by calling published a proposed rule entitled the Federal Information Relay Service at Enterprise Cost of Funds: Cost of funds ‘‘Uniform Financial Reporting (800) 877–8339. Additional information used in computing the cost of new debt for Standards for HUD Housing Programs, is available from the REAC Web site at the Enterprises during the Stress Test, as Additional Entity Filing Requirements.’’ http://www.hud.gov/reac/. specified in section 3.3.3[a]3.c., of this The preamble to the rule (although not Appendix. the rule text) misstates the date by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On * * * * * which the financial statements of November 30, 2001, HUD published a Dated: December 11, 2001. entities covered by the rule must submit proposed rule entitled ‘‘Uniform Armando Falcon, Jr., their financial statements electronically. Financial Reporting Standards for HUD Housing Programs, Additional Entity Director, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise This notice corrects the preamble. Filing Requirements’’ at 66 FR 60132. Oversight. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about the entities The preamble to the proposed rule, in [FR Doc. 01–30898 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] covered by the proposed rule and this the third column of that page, BILLING CODE 4220–01–P correction notice, Lynn Herbert, the immediately above the ‘‘Findings and Office of Housing, U.S. Department of Certifications’’ section, states:
VerDate 11
This rule when issued as a final rule would Notice of Proposed Rule-Making subcontractors to post notices informing be effective for the covered Title I and Title (NPRM) that was published in the their employees that under Federal law, II nonsupervised lenders, nonsupervised Federal Register on October 1, 2001. those employees have certain rights mortgagees, and loan correspondents after The NPRM proposed a regulation to related to union membership and use of December 31, 2001. Audited financial implement Executive Order 13201, union dues and fees. The Order also statements submitted by the covered entities on or after January 1, 2002 must be submitted which was signed by President George provides the text of contractual electronically. Audited financial statements W. Bush on February 17, 2001. provisions that Federal Government submitted prior to January 1, 2002, may DATES: Submission Period: Duplicate contracting departments and agencies either be submitted in paper or electronically copies of comments that were originally must include in every Government at the lenders’ option. submitted by U.S. mail before the contract, except for collective bargaining Due to the time frame of this November 30, 2001, close of the agreements (as defined in 5 U.S.C. rulemaking, the effective date has been comment period, and that have not yet 7103(a)(8)) and contracts for purchases pushed back to June 1, 2002, which is been received by OLMS, must be under the Simplified Acquisition stated correctly in the regulation at submitted and received by January 2, Threshold (as defined in the Office of § 5.801(d)(3). In the proposed rule 2002. Federal Procurement Policy Act, 41 U.S.C. 403). The Rule proposed in the published on November 30, 2001, the ADDRESSES: Duplicate copies of NPRM would provide the text of the second paragraph in the third column comments originally submitted via U.S. required contractual provisions, explain on page 60132 as FR Doc 01–29680 mail during the comment period should exemptions, and set forth procedures for quoted above should read: be sent to Don Todd, Deputy Assistant ensuring compliance with the Order; it Secretary for Labor-Management This rule when issued as a final rule would also would contain other related Programs, Office of Labor-Management- be effective for the covered Title I and Title requirements. See 66 FR 50010 et seq. Standards, Employment Standards II nonsupervised lenders, nonsupervised Both the Executive Order and the Administration, U.S. Department of mortgagees, and loan correspondents after Proposed Rule were intended to inform May 31, 2001. Audited financial statements Labor. Because of the special employees of their rights under the submitted by the covered entities on or after circumstances, described below, that decisions of the United States Supreme June 1, 2002 must be submitted require the issuance of this notice, Court in Communications Workers of electronically. Audited financial statements OLMS prefers that such duplicate America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), submitted prior to June 1, 2002, may either copies and accompanying be submitted on paper or electronically at the and related cases. documentation (see below) be lenders’ option. The NPRM invited comments on the transmitted by facsimile (FAX) machine Proposed Rule. Comments were to be Dated: December 12, 2001. or e-mail. The e-mail address for submitted to Deputy Assistant Secretary Aaron Santa Anna, transmitting these documents is OLMS- Don Todd at the Department of Labor’s Assistant General Counsel, for Regulations. [email protected]. The telephone (the Department’s) main building, the number of the FAX receiver is (202) [FR Doc. 01–31049 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Frances Perkins Building (FPB), in 693–1340. Please note that the NPRM BILLING CODE 4210–27–P Washington, DC. The NPRM established originally limited comments sent via the deadline for receipt of such FAX transmittal to five pages or fewer; comments as November 30, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR however, this limitation will not apply On October 22, 2001, because postal to transmission of duplicate copies. As workers at the U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Labor-Management described in detail in the Brentwood mail distribution center in Standards ‘‘Supplementary Information’’ section Washington, DC, were found to have below, arrangements for hard-copy been exposed to anthrax bacteria, the 29 CFR Part 470 delivery may also be made by contacting Department temporarily closed its OLMS. RIN 1215–AB33 mailrooms in the Washington As set forth in the NPRM, comments metropolitan area that received mail will be available for public inspection Obligations of Federal Contractors and from Brentwood, including the during normal business hours at the mailroom in the Frances Perkins Subcontractors; Notice of Employee above address. Rights Concerning Payment of Union Building. As a result, all mail that was FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Dues or Fees addressed to the FPB (including all first- Oshel, Chief, Division of Interpretations class mail postmarked October 12 or AGENCY: Office of Labor-Management and Standards, Office of Labor- later) was redirected to a Lima, Ohio, Standards, Employment Standards Management Standards, Employment facility to be irradiated. This situation Administration, Labor. Standards Administration, U.S. was not anticipated when OLMS set the ACTION: Notice of request for duplicate Department of Labor, 200 Constitution deadline for receipt of comments on the copies of comments affected by mail Avenue, NW, Room N–5605, NPRM. delivery problems. Washington, DC 20210, (202) 693–1233 The FPB mailroom reopened on (this is not a toll-free number). Monday, November 26, 2001. However, SUMMARY: The Office of Labor- Individuals with hearing impairments because of the large amount of mail that Management Standards (OLMS) is may call 1–800–877–8339 (TTY/TDD). was redirected to Ohio for irradiation, seeking information about, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On delivery of the redirected mail to its duplicate copies of, public comments October 1, 2001, OLMS published the intended recipients has not yet been that may have been submitted via U.S. above-mentioned NPRM. See 66 FR completed, and may not be completed mail, but that have not yet been received 50010. The NPRM proposed a Rule to for some time. by OLMS because of mail delivery implement Executive Order 13201 (66 As of December 12, 2001, OLMS has problems that the U.S. Department of FR 11221, February 22, 2001). As set received comments about the NPRM Labor experienced from October forth in detail in the preamble to the from the following six commenters: the through December of 2001. The subject NPRM, that Order requires non-exempt National Legal and Policy Center; the of such comments would have been a Government contractors and Employment Policy Foundation; the
VerDate 11
National Right to Work Legal Defense hearing would be held if a hearing is DATES: Comments: Send written Foundation, Inc.; the Associated requested. comments on this proposed rule by General Contractors of America, Inc.; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For January 18, 2002. LPA, Inc.; and a group of Members of further information about this ADDRESSES: You may send written Congress who serve on the U.S. House correction, contact Chris McKenna, comments in paper form to Margaret of Representatives Committee on Chemical Engineer, Office of Borushko, U.S. EPA, National Vehicle Education and the Workforce. OLMS Transportation and Air Quality, and Fuels Emission Laboratory, 2000 seeks information about, and duplicate Transportation and Regional Programs Traverwood, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. We copies of comments from, any other Division, at (202) 564–9037 or must receive them by the date indicated individuals or organizations who [email protected]. under DATES above. You may also submitted comments about the NPRM submit comments via e-mail to via U.S. mail during the comment Correction [email protected]. In your period. Such duplicate copies should be In proposed rule FR Doc. 01–29777, correspondence, refer to Docket A– accompanied by documentation beginning on page 60163 in the issue of 2000–01. establishing that the comments were December 3, 2001, make the following FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: originally mailed on or before the correction in the DATES section. On page Margaret Borushko, U.S. EPA, National November 30 deadline. 60163 in the 2nd column, replace the Vehicle and Fuels Emission Laboratory, Duplicate copies of comments and text, 2000 Traverwood, Ann Arbor, MI accompanying documentation may be ‘‘If a hearing is requested within 20 48105; Telephone (734) 214–4334; FAX: delivered via facsimile or e-mail at the days of the date of publication of this (734) 214–4816; E-mail: phone number and address listed above. document in the Federal Register, a [email protected]. EPA Where necessary, hard copies may also hearing will be held on December 24, hearings and comments hotline: 734– be delivered to the address listed above 2001 at the location indicated in the 214–4370. in the ‘‘For Further Information ADDRESSES section below.’’ Contact’’ section, via hand delivery, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA courier service, or a package delivery with the following text: published a notice of proposed service such as United Parcel Service, ‘‘If a hearing is requested no later than rulemaking in the Federal Register of FedEx, or Airborne Express. OLMS December 24, 2001, a hearing will be October 5, 2001 (66 FR 51098). That recommends that, where such hard copy held at a time and place to be published document included a deadline for delivery is necessary, the commenter in the Federal Register.’’ written comments of December 19, contact OLMS by telephone in advance 2001. Since that time, we have received Dated: December 11, 2001. requests for an extension of that to make appropriate arrangements for Robert D. Brenner, delivery. deadline to allow additional time to Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Air review and comment on the proposed Signed at Washington, D.C., this 14th day and Radiation. emission standards. As a result of such of December, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–31179 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] requests, EPA is extending the comment D. Cameron Findlay, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P period on the proposed rule to January Deputy Secretary. 18, 2002. Don Todd, The testimony and transcripts from Deputy Assistant Secretary for Labor- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION the public hearings and other materials Management Programs. AGENCY have been placed in the docket since we [FR Doc. 01–31210 Filed 12–17–01; 10:33 published the proposal. Additional 40 CFR Parts 89, 90, 91, 94, 1048, 1051, am] information will be placed in the docket 1065, and 1068 BILLING CODE 4510–CP–P as it becomes available. We therefore [AMS–FRL–7119–2] encourage interested parties to stay RIN 2060–AI11 abreast of docketed materials to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION extent possible. AGENCY Control of Emissions from Nonroad Dated: December 11, 2001. Large Spark Ignition Engines and Robert D, Brenner, 40 CFR Part 80 Recreational Engines (Marine and Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Land-Based); Extension of Comment [FRL–7119–1] Radiation. Period [FR Doc. 01–31178 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] RIN 2060–AJ79 AGENCY: Environmental Protection BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Regulation of Fuel and Fuel Additives: Agency (EPA). Reformulated Gasoline Terminal ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of Receipt Date comment period. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AGENCY: Environmental Protection SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Agency published in the Federal 47 CFR Part 73 ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. Register of October 5, 2001 a notice of proposed rulemaking proposing new [DA 01–2736; MM Docket No. 01–323; RM– 10337] SUMMARY: This document corrects the emission standards for large spark- preamble to a proposed rule published ignition engines, recreational vehicles Television Broadcasting Services; in the Federal Register of December 3, using spark-ignition engines, and Vernal and Santaquin, UT; and Ely and 2001, regarding establishment of a new recreational marine diesel engines. This Caliente, NV compliance date for the reformulated document extends the period for written gasoline program. This correction comments on that notice of proposed AGENCY: Federal Communications clarifies when and where a public rulemaking to January 18, 2002. Commission.
VerDate 11
ACTION: Proposed rule. should note that from the time a Notice replacement of defective or of Proposed Rulemaking is issued until noncompliant tires shall include a plan SUMMARY: This document requests the matter is no longer subject to addressing how to prevent, to the extent comments on a petition for rulemaking Commission consideration or court reasonably within the manufacturer’s jointly filed on behalf of petitioners TV review, all ex parte contacts are control, the replaced tires from being 6, L.L.C., permittee of VHF TV Station prohibited in Commission proceedings, resold for installation on a motor KBCJ, NTSC Channel 6, Vernal, Utah such as this one, which involve channel vehicle, and also how to limit, to the (BPCT–960919KG), and by allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for extent reasonably within the Kaleidoscope Foundation, Inc., rules governing permissible ex parte manufacturer’s control, the disposal of permittee of VHF TV Station KBNY, contacts. For information regarding replaced tires in landfills. Section 7 also NTSC Channel 6, Ely, Nevada (BPET– proper filing procedures for comments, requires the manufacturer to include 970331LN). Petitioners request the see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. information about the implementation reallotment of NTSC Channel 6 from of the plan in quarterly reports to the List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Vernal to Santaquin, Utah and Secretary about the progress of any reallotment of NTSC Channel 6 from Ely Television broadcasting. notification and remedy campaigns. to Caliente, Nevada as the communities’ For the reasons discussed in the DATES: Comments: You should submit first local television transmission preamble, the Federal Communications your comments early enough to ensure services and modification of the their Commission proposes to amend part 73 that Docket Management receives them authorizations accordingly, pursuant to of Title 47 of the Code of Federal not later than February 19, 2002. the provisions of section 1.420(i) of the Regulations as follows: Commission’s rules. Coordinates to be ADDRESSES: You should mention the used for NTSC Channel 6 at Santaquin docket number of this document in your PART 73—TELEVISION BROADCAST comments, and submit your comments are North Latitude 39–43–58 and West SERVICES Longitude 111–56–34; and those to be in writing to Docket Management, Room used for NTSC Channel 6 at Caliente are 1. The authority citation for part 73 PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, North Latitude 37–47–00 and West reads as follows: Washington, DC 20590. You may also Longitude 114–30–00. The DTV Table of submit your comments electronically by Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, and logging onto the Dockets Management Allotments contained in section 336. 73.622(b) of the Commission’s rules is System website at http://dms.dot.gov. not affected by the requested § 73.606 [Amended] Click on ‘‘Help & Information’’ or reallotments as there is no paired DTV 2. Section 73.606(b), the Table of TV ‘‘Help/info’’ to obtain instructions for channel for either Vernal or Ely. Allotments under Utah, is amended by filing the document electronically. Regardless of how you submit your DATES: adding Santaquin, NTSC Channel 6 and Comments must be filed on or comments, you should mention the before January 14, 2002, and reply removing NTSC Channel 6 at Vernal. 3. Section 73.606(b), the Table of TV docket number of this document in your comments on or before January 29, comments. 2002. Allotments under Nevada, is amended by adding Caliente, NTSC Channel 6+ You may call Docket Management at ADDRESSES: Federal Communications and removing NTSC Channel 6+ at Ely. 202–366–9324. You may visit Docket Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In Management from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., addition to filing comments with the Federal Communications Commission. Monday through Friday. FCC, interested parties should serve the John A. Karousos, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For petitioner’s counsel, as follows: Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules non-legal issues, contact Jonathan Mark N. Lipp, Esq., Shook, Hardy & Division, Mass Media Bureau. White, Office of Defects Investigation, Bacon, 600 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800, [FR Doc. 01–31187 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] tel. (202) 366–5226. For legal issues, Washington, DC 20005 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P contact Enid Rubenstein, Office of Chief FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Counsel, tel. (202) 366–5263. Bertron Withers, Jr., Mass Media SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Bureau, (202) 418–2180. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a I. Background synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of National Highway Traffic Safety On November 1, 2000, the TREAD Proposed Rulemaking, MM Docket No. Administration Act, Pub. L. 106–414, was enacted. The 01–323, adopted November 14, 2001, statute was, in part, a response to and released November 23, 2001. The 49 CFR Part 573 congressional concerns related to the full text of this Commission decision is [Docket No. NHTSA–2001–10856] tire recall being conducted by available for inspection and copying Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. during normal business hours in the RIN 2127–AI29 (‘‘Firestone’’) during the summer and FCC’s Reference Center (Room CY- Motor Vehicle Safety; Disposition of fall of 2000 with respect to safety- A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Recalled Tires related defects in about 6.5 million Washington, DC. The complete text of Firestone ATX and ATX II size P235/ this decision may also be purchased AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 75R15 tires (manufactured at all U.S. from the Commission’s copy contractor, Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. Firestone plants) and Firestone Qualtex International, Portals II, 425 ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. Wilderness AT tires of that size 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, manufactured at Firestone’s Decatur, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (202) SUMMARY: This proposes a rule Illinois plant. 863–2893, facsimile 202–863–2898, or implementing section 7 of the Under 49 U.S.C. 30118(b), NHTSA via e-mail [email protected]. Transportation Recall Enhancement, may make a final decision that a motor Provisions of the Regulatory Accountability, and Documentation vehicle or replacement equipment Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to (TREAD) Act. Section 7 provides that a (including a tire) contains a defect this proceeding. Members of the public manufacturer’s remedy program for the related to motor vehicle safety or does
VerDate 11
not comply with an applicable Federal plans to preclude resale and for information about implementation of motor vehicle safety standard. In disposition of replaced tires, we are their plans in the quarterly reports that addition, under 49 U.S.C. 30118(c), a proposing to amend 49 CFR 573.5 and the manufacturers must file with us manufacturer of a motor vehicle or 573.6. Below are a summary and under our reporting regulations,49 CFR replacement equipment (including a explanation of the provisions of today’s 573.6. tire) is required to notify NHTSA if the proposed rule. Defective tires pose a substantial risk manufacturer decides that the vehicle or to motor vehicle safety. The Firestone equipment contains a defect that is II. Discussion tires that have been recalled have been related to motor vehicle safety or does A. Introduction and Background associated with numerous deaths. The not comply with an applicable Federal recall included both new tires in stock motor vehicle safety standard. In either 1. Reason for TREAD Requirements and used tires. Many of the remaining instance, in the case of tires, the a. Need To Prevent Resale of Recalled tires had considerable remaining tread manufacturer of the defective or Tires and could have been reused if they had not been physically altered to preclude noncompliant tires (including original The provision in section 7 of the equipment tires that are installed on or their use on a motor vehicle. TREAD Act that requires manufacturers The management and disposition of sold with new motor vehicles, as well to provide plans to prevent the resale of as replacement tires) is required under tires is an ongoing environmental recalled tires for use on motor vehicles 49 U.S.C. 30119 to notify tire owners of concern that can be aggravated by a supplements the pre-TREAD Act ban on the defect or noncompliance and is safety recall. More than 270 million tires the sale of new defective or required under 49 U.S.C. 30120(b) to are scrapped annually in the United noncompliant motor vehicles or motor repair or replace the defective or States. Although the 6.5 million tires vehicle equipment, unless and until (if noncompliant tires within 60 days of involved in last year’s Firestone recall possible) they have been remedied. 49 the notification to owners about the would in the aggregate amount to a U.S.C. 30120(i). It also supplements recall or about the availability of substantial volume of tires, the recall section 8 of the TREAD Act, which replacement tires. (This 60-day period has been characterized as representing prohibits the sale or lease of any (new may be extended if replacement tires are ‘‘just a drop in the bucket’’ compared to not available promptly.) or used) defective or noncompliant the numbers of tires disposed of Also, pre-TREAD Act law, 49 U.S.C. motor vehicle equipment (including a annually. See ‘‘Recalled Tires Just a 30120(d), required the manufacturer to tire) for installation on a motor vehicle, Drop in the Industry Bucket,’’ Recycling file with the Secretary a copy of the unless and until (if possible) the defect Today, News (October 2000), http:// manufacturer’s program for remedying a or noncompliance has been remedied. recyclbroker.com/info-tires.htm. A copy defect or noncompliance. But section 49 U.S.C. 30120(j). Finally, it is also of this article has been placed in the 30120(d) did not require the related to section 3(c) of the TREAD Act, docket for this rulemaking. manufacturer’s program to include a which requires any person who (1) In addition to being unsightly and plan for the disposition or disposal of knowingly and willfully sells or leases large, stockpiled ‘‘scrap’’ tires may recalled tires that were returned by the for use on a motor vehicle a defective present serious health and tire owners or purchasers. tire or a tire not in compliance with environmental risks. Tire piles can Section 7 of the TREAD Act expanded applicable safety standards and (2) has collect gas, and they provide breeding 49 U.S.C. 30120(d) to require a actual knowledge that the manufacturer grounds for rodents and mosquitoes. manufacturer’s remedy program for tires of such tire has notified its dealers of Whole tires tend to rise in a landfill and to include a plan for preventing, to the such defect or noncompliance, to report come to the surface, which may extent reasonably within the that sale or lease to NHTSA. 49 U.S.C. compromise a landfill cover, and allow manufacturer’s control, the resale of 30166(n). NHTSA has already issued water to enter a landfill which would replaced tires for use on motor vehicles, regulations implementing section generate leachate. Tire piles also are as well as a plan for the disposition of 30166(n); see 49 CFR 573.10. susceptible to fire from arson, lightning, replaced tires, particularly through Most tires that are recalled are and even spontaneous combustion. Tire methods such as shredding, crumbling, unrepairable, and therefore most are pile fires pollute the air and are difficult recycling, recovery, or other ‘‘beneficial replaced rather than repaired. Section 7 to extinguish. Water used to extinguish non-vehicular uses,’’ rather than in of TREAD recognizes the reality that tire them becomes polluted with toxic landfills. Further, section 7 requires the recalls may result in the creation of substances and may pollute manufacturer to include information stockpiles of dangerous, unremedied watercourses. about the implementation of its plan in tires and requires manufacturers to 2. State Regulation of Management and quarterly reports that it is required to develop plans to deal with them. Disposal of Scrap Tires make to the Secretary about the progress a. Problems Posed by Scrap Tires of its notification and remedy Because of the environmental risks campaigns. Today’s proposed rule would require posed by scrap tires, many states ban The TREAD Act authorizes the manufacturers to develop plans the disposal of whole scrap tires in Secretary of Transportation (‘‘the addressing how they will prevent, to the landfills, and 49 of the 50 states have Secretary’’) to issue various rules extent reasonably within the some form of regulations that cover relating to a manufacturer’s notification manufacturers’ control, recalled tires scrap tire management, including in and remedy program, to carry out from being resold for use on motor some instances charges for tire disposal Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United vehicles, and that limit the disposal of and financial incentives for using scrap States Code, which is commonly recalled tires in landfills and provide tires in other products. These state laws referred to as the Safety Act. This instead, to the extent reasonably within and regulations are summarized briefly rulemaking authority has been delegated the manufacturers’ control, for in a booklet published by the U.S. to NHTSA’s Administrator in 49 CFR disposition by other means, such as Environmental Protection Agency 1.50. shredding, crumbling, recycling, and (‘‘EPA’’), State Scrap Tire Programs: A In order to implement section 7’s new recovery. The proposed rule also would Quick Reference Guide: 1999 Update requirements concerning manufacturers’ require manufacturers to include (EPA–530–99–002) (August 1999). This
VerDate 11
booklet presents a matrix that under pressure. Crumb rubber also can tires, the manufacturer shall include a summarizes each state’s scrap tire be used in railroad crossings. Shredded plan addressing how to prevent programs and regulations, provides tires can be used as bulking agents in replaced tires from being resold for use information about how to contact state the composting of wastewater treatment on motor vehicles or disposed of in scrap tire program managers, and sludge. Chipped tires can be used for landfills. In this amendment, Congress describes grants and other programs that playground gravel substitutes and added these requirements to the pre- are intended to improve scrap tire lightweight road fill material. Whole or existing 30120(d) requirement that a disposal and recycling and reduction. A partial scrap tires also can be used for manufacturer file with the Secretary a copy of this booklet has been placed in artificial reefs, breakwaters, erosion copy of the manufacturer’s program for the docket for this rulemaking action; it control, playground equipment, remedying a defect or noncompliance. is also available at EPA’s website: (http:/ commercial fishing equipment, and In this context, the use of the term /www.epa.gov) . This is included in the highway crash barriers. See ‘‘EPA ‘‘manufacturer’’ in section 7 indicates docket as illustrative background Market Summary,’’ pp. 8–9. This that the term applies to all material and not as an official statement booklet has been placed in the docket manufacturers that conduct recalls of or interpretation of applicable legal for this rulemaking action. See also A. tires under the Safety Act to correct requirements. Moorse, ‘‘Recycled rubber goods maker safety-related defects or moves into production stage,’’ Capital 3. Possible Uses for Scrap Tires noncompliances with applicable District Business Review, Sept. 2, 2000. standards. Today’s steel-belted radial tires are A hard copy of this article has been Tires are motor vehicle equipment. not biodegradable and are difficult to placed in the docket for this rulemaking With respect to the recall provisions of dispose of or recycle, because they are action; it also is available at http:// the Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. 30118–30121, made of a mixture of fabric, steel, albany.bcentral.com/albany/stories/ by regulation tires are considered as carbon black, and several types of 20000/09/04/story3.html. replacement equipment, even if they natural and synthetic rubbers. Scrap tires can also be used as fuel. were installed on a motor vehicle at the According to the U.S. Department of They represent a potentially significant time of first sale. 49 CFR 579.4(b)(2). Energy (‘‘DOE’’), estimates of the energy source, because they have a heat Therefore, tire manufacturers have the number of ‘‘scrap’’ tires in stockpiles value slightly higher than that of coal duty to conduct notification and remedy around the United States range from 500 (EPA Market Summary, p. 5) and they campaigns to address defective or million to three billion. See DOE, are comparable to or better than coal in noncompliant tires, including tires Consumer Energy Information: EEC terms of emissions of some pollutants. installed on new vehicles. See 49 CFR Reference Briefs, http:// See L.Chubb, ‘‘Firestone recall: Where 579.5(b). Tire brand name owners, such www.eren.doe.gov/consumerinfo/ have all the tires gone?’’ Environmental as retail chain stores that sell tires under refbriefs/ee9/html, which has been News Network (‘‘ENN’’) , 9/20/2000 their own ‘‘private labels’’ or ‘‘house placed in the docket for this rulemaking (citing statement of John Serumgard of labels’’ are also considered action). Additional environmental the Scrap Tire Management Council). manufacturers (49 U.S.C. 30102(b)(1)(E)) information relevant to the subject of Power plants, tire manufacturing plants, and have the same defect and this rulemaking is available on the cement kilns, and pulp and paper mills noncompliance reporting requirements Scrap Tire Management Council have used tires as fuel. Usually they as manufacturers under 49 CFR Website and on the Website of Scrap burn tires that have been shredded into 573.3(d). All of these would be required Tire News (http:// chunks (also known as tire-derived-fuel, to file reports required under the www.scraptirenews.com/archive.html), or ‘‘tdf’’), because they do not have the proposed rule, if their tires were found published by the Recycling Research capability to burn whole tires. Some to be defective or noncompliant. Institute of Suffield. CT. plants can produce their own tdf in In rare circumstances, vehicle The need to develop uses for ‘‘scrap’’ furnaces; others can use tdf prepared by manufacturers also may conduct recall tires has been recognized for many others. According to one source, last campaigns regarding tires installed on years, by government agencies and by year, a total of 110 electricity generating the tire industry, which has established their new vehicles. For example, Ford facilities in the U.S. held permits to Motor Company (Ford) recently a Scrap Tire Management Council, a burn tires. See Chubb, ‘‘Firestone recall nonprofit organization that is devoted to announced a recall to replace tires on ***’’, supra. A hard copy of this MY 2002 Ford Explorer vehicles whose expanding the market for scrap tires. article has been placed in the docket for (The council’s Website address is http:/ sidewalls had been cut during the this rulemaking action; it also is vehicle assembly process. Because the /www.rma.org/scraptires/ available from ENN’s website (http:// scraptires.html). Section 7 of the TREAD tire disposition problem also affects www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2000/ tires that are removed during these Act recognizes this same need. 09/09202000/tires—31672.asp?P=2). Another EPA booklet, Summary of recalls, the proposed rule also applies to Markets for Scrap Tires (EPA/530–SW– B. Who Would be Required to Comply vehicle manufacturers that initiate tire 90–0748 (October 1991)) (‘‘EPA Market with the Requirements to file Programs recalls. Summary’’), describes potential market and Reports about Disposition and C. What Elements Would the uses for scrap tires. These uses include Disposal of Recalled Tires? Manufacturers’ Plans Address? the manufacture of crumb rubber, which We are proposing that the rule’s may be incorporated into asphalt requirements apply to all manufacturers 1. Summary pavement, into rubber products such as that conduct tire recalls, including We are proposing to require floor mats, vehicle mud guards and vehicle manufacturers that conduct manufacturers to include information carpet padding, and into plastic recalls to correct defects in their about their plans for incapacitating and products such as floor mats and vehicles in which the remedy is the disposing of recalled tires in their adhesives, or processed further into replacement of tires. remedy programs, and to require that reclaimed rubber, which is made by TREAD section 7’s amendment to manufacturers implement these plans. mixing crumb rubber with water, oil subsection 30120(d) provides that, for a We are proposing that manufacturers’ and chemicals and heating the mixture remedy involving the replacement of plans address, at a minimum, three
VerDate 11
major issues: (1) Ways of assuring that from being sold for installation on motor Firestone stores and authorized service the entities replacing the tires are aware vehicles, unless they had been centers and remove scrap tires; (3) of legal prohibitions on the sale of the remedied, to the extent that the recalled scrap tires are being transported defective or noncompliant tires under manufacturer could reasonably control directly to licensed and permitted the Safety Act, (2) methods to impair such resales. See H.R. Report No. 106– recycling facilities or to Firestone recalled tires so that they cannot be 954, 106th Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 4, 15. distribution facilities where they are used on a vehicle, and (3) the This provision did not address the issue checked to ensure that they have been disposition of recalled tires, consistent of how to dispose of the unremedied rendered useless and then transported with applicable laws and in ways that tires, nor did any other part of the to licensed and permitted recycling minimize their deposit in landfills. original bill. facilities; and (4) ‘‘[t]he majority of the NHTSA believes that the extent of the The first version of the ‘‘anti-landfill’’ recalled tires are being shredded or manufacturer’s control over recalled portion of section 7 of the TREAD Act, beneficially reused as fuel for power tires likely would vary, depending on which was intended to preclude plants or cement kilns, or ground into the nature of the manufacturer’s disposition of recalled tires in public crumb rubber for recycling into a variety relationship with each of the facilities landfills, was proposed as amendment of useful products such as playground that replace the recalled tires, which 1(k) to H.R. 5164, offered by mats, asphalt, and soaker irrigation may range from wholly-owned and Congressman Pallone on October 5, hoses.’’ It also stated that ‘‘none of the franchised tire dealers to independent 2000. This proposed amendment would recalled tires are being redistributed or tire dealers, motor vehicle dealers, and have provided that ‘‘[n]o person may retreaded.’’ This Fact Sheet is available service stations. We are proposing that dispose of any [recalled tire] except in in the docket for this rulemaking. where the manufacturer controls the tire a fashion that protects the public health 4. Plan Elements outlet, the manufacturer direct proper and safety. Disposal of such tires in a disposition of the tire. Where the public landfill shall not be considered We are proposing that manufacturers’ manufacturer does not have control, we adequate protection of the public’s plans include three elements. are proposing that the manufacturer health and safety.’’ Prior to passage of First, the plans would have to address provide informational materials to the the House bill (H.R. 5164), this legal requirements established by the outlets, including information about the amendment was withdrawn. See H.R. Safety Act. In addition to the legal prohibitions on the resale of the Rep. No. 106–954, supra, at p. 9. notifications of the existence of a defect tires. Eventually, section 6 of the H.R. 5164 or noncompliance required under 49 We are proposing ‘‘exceptions was expanded to include a restriction U.S.C. 30118–30119, at a minimum reporting’’, by manufacturer-controlled on the disposition of recalled tires in manufacturers would be required to tire outlets to manufacturers monthly landfills. The ‘‘reasonable extent of notify all entities that are authorized to and by manufacturers to NHTSA in control’’ language from section 6 was replace the tires in question, including quarterly reports filed pursuant to 49 applied to the ‘‘anti-landfill’’ provision their owned stores, franchised dealers, CFR 573.6. These reports would identify as well as to the ‘‘no resale without and distributors, as well as independent the aggregate number of recalled tires repair’’ provision; the references to dealers, about the prohibitions and which the manufacturer becomes aware ‘‘protection of the public health and notification requirements in the Safety have not been rendered unsuitable for safety’’ and the direct prohibition of use Act as they apply to recalled tires. This resale for installation on a motor vehicle of recalled tires in landfills were includes the ban on the sale of new in accordance with the manufacturer’s dropped from the ‘‘anti-landfill’’ defective or noncompliant tires (49 plan; the aggregate number of recalled provision. Both provisions, with U.S.C. 30120(i), see generally 66 FR tires which the manufacturer becomes identical reporting requirements, appear 38247 et seq. (July 23, 2001)); the aware have been disposed of in in section 7 of the TREAD Act. The prohibition on the sale of new and used violation of applicable state and local legislative history does not provide defective and noncompliant tires (49 laws and regulations; and a description further explanation of Congress’ action. U.S.C. 30120(j), see generally 66 FR 38247 et seq. (July 23, 2001)); and the of any such failures of tire outlets to act 3. The August 2000 Firestone Recall in accordance with the manufacturer’s duty to notify NHTSA of any sale of a plan, including an identification of the Firestone prepared a Recall Fact Sheet new or used recalled tire for use on a outlets in question. (‘‘Fact Sheet’’), dated August 30, 2000, motor vehicle (49 U.S.C. 30166(n)), see which was intended to provide Federal, generally 49 CFR 573.10, 66 FR 38159 2. Legislative Background State and local authorities with et seq. (July 23, 2001)). The As described above, section 7 of the information about the scrap tires manufacturer would have to provide TREAD Act provides for two collected during the company’s August informational materials on the independent plans for the disposition of 2000 recall. The Fact Sheet contained a prohibitions and notification recalled tires: (1) Plans for the general description of the procedures in requirements to all authorized restriction of the resale of recalled tires place at the 13,000 authorized service replacement outlets. For the tire outlets and (2) plans for the limitation of the centers that were replacing recalled tires that are company-owned or otherwise disposal of recalled tires in landfills. to manage the proper disposition of subject to the control of the Each may be qualified by the degree of those tires. It outlined the following four manufacturer, the manufacturer would the manufacturer’s control over the tire elements: (1) To ensure that recalled also be required to provide written replacement process. The first of these tires are not reused on vehicles, the tires direction to the person in charge of each provisions was addressed originally in are to be rendered useless by drilling a outlet to comply with the law and to proposed section 6 of the House Bill hole in or cutting through the sidewall notify all employees involved in underlying the TREAD Act, ‘‘Sales of upon removal from the vehicle; (2) the replacing, handling, or disposing of Replaced Equipment,’’ which would company arranged with its current scrap recalled tires of the requirements. have amended 49 U.S.C. 30120 by tire vendors for additional pickups of Second, manufacturers would be adding a requirement, at subsection (d), scrap tires from company-owned stores required to set forth their programs to for the manufacturer to have a plan and arranged with its ‘‘normal assure, insofar as possible, that the addressing how to prevent replaced tires transportation vendors’’ to visit recalled tires are not resold for
VerDate 11
installation on a motor vehicle. As disposition in their contracts for supply question. To permit manufacturers to above, company-owned and other stores of replacement tires to independent report this information in a timely controlled by the company would be outlets. If this were done, it would help fashion, the proposal would require directed to permanently alter the tires so to assure appropriate disposition of manufacturer-controlled outlets that that they could not be used on vehicles. recalled tires by outlets not controlled dispose of tires to report the same This could include, for example, by the manufacturer. Because we do not categories of information monthly to the drilling substantial (e.g. 1⁄2 inch) holes know whether manufacturers’ past and/ manufacturer. We seek comments on in the sidewalls, cutting the tire beads, or existing contracts contain restrictions effective reporting mechanisms and on or sawing the tires in half. To ensure or other provisions with respect to the the burdens that such reporting would that this alteration is performed, we are re-use and disposition of recalled tires, impose on the outlets. also proposing that stores be directed to the proposed rule does not address this do it before the end of the business day topic. We seek comments on this issue, D. What Role Does NHTSA Intend to on which the recalled tire has been as well as on whether conditions could Play With Respect to the Manufacturers’ removed from the vehicle. We seek be included in the future and what they Plans for the Disposition of Tires? comments on whether this time period would be. Under today’s proposal, NHTSA’s role is sufficient or whether, and why, a In addition, manufacturers would be with respect to reviewing the different time period should be required to implement their plans for manufacturers’ plans for the disposition specified. The manufacturer would have conducting programs to ensure that of recalled tires would be limited to to provide authorized tire outlets that it recalled tires are rendered unsuitable for examining the manufacturers’ plans, does not control with guidance on how installation on a motor vehicle for resale programs, and reports to see whether to permanently alter the tires so that and for limiting the disposal of recalled they contain the required items of they could not be used on vehicles and tires in landfills. information. We believe that our list of request them to do that promptly. We seek comments on the above Third, manufacturers would be proposal for plans and, depending on required reporting elements is required to describe their plans aimed at the comments, may modify the plan sufficiently comprehensive and specific limiting the disposal of recalled tires in requirements. If you suggest additional to ensure that the plans will effectuate landfills and, instead, channeling them items, please include in your comments Congressional objectives. Also, the into a category of positive reuse information about the associated costs. proposed rule would require that the manufacturers’ plans demonstrate that (shredding, crumbling, recycling, and 5. Quarterly Reporting recovery) or another alternative they have directed the entities that are beneficial non-vehicular use. The Section 7 provides that we must replacing recalled tires to dispose of proposed rule would require that the require manufacturers to ‘‘include them in accordance with applicable manufacturers’ plans provide that information about the implementation laws. We note that in virtually every company-controlled outlets dispose of of such plan with each quarterly report state, the disposition of used tires all recalled tires in accordance with to the Secretary regarding the progress already is subject to regulation under applicable state and/or local laws and of any notification [and] remedy State and/or local statutes and regulations. We are further proposing campaigns.’’ The contents of these regulations. However, we do not have that manufacturers provide directions to quarterly reports are currently described the resources or the expertise to review their stores and guidance to in 49 CFR 573.6. the manufacturers’ characterizations of independent dealers about disposition In order to minimize administrative applicable requirements under those of tires in a manner that, to the extent burdens on manufacturers, we do not environmental laws. Of course, the possible, avoids landfilling. plan to require that manufacturers failure of a manufacturer to implement We seek comments on whether to include in their quarterly reports the its plan in accordance with its terms require manufacturers to provide outlets number of recalled tires that have been would constitute a violation of the that are authorized to replace tires with rendered unsuitable for resale on motor Safety Act. information that summarizes the vehicles or the number of recalled tires III. Regulatory Analyses and Notices applicable laws and regulations that have been disposed of by various regarding disposal of tires in their means. Instead, we propose to require A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT jurisdictions and that identifies ‘‘exceptions reporting’’ under which Regulatory Policies and Procedures reputable tire collection and manufacturers must advise us of only transportation contractors as well as those instances of which they become We have considered the impact of this facilities in their areas that would aware in which their plans were not proposed rulemaking action under E.O. accept unrepairable recalled tires for a followed. The required quarterly reports 12866 and the Department of beneficial use. We believe that this from manufacturers to us would include Transportation’s regulatory policies and information would be useful to outlets the aggregate number of recalled tires procedures. This rulemaking was not that replace recalled tires, but we do not which the manufacturer becomes aware reviewed under E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory know the extent to which they already have not been rendered unsuitable for Planning and Review.’’ This rulemaking have it. We assume that some resale for installation on a motor vehicle is not considered ‘‘significant’’ under manufacturers already provide such in accordance with the manufacturer’s the Department of Transportation’s information, but we do not know how plan and the aggregate number of regulatory policies and procedures. The many do so or the types of information recalled tires which the manufacturer impacts of this rule are expected to be that are provided. We are interested in becomes aware have been disposed of in so minimal as not to warrant comments on whether providing this violation of applicable state and local preparation of a full regulatory information has proved useful to laws and regulations. The manufacturer evaluation because this provision manufacturers and their dealers and on would also be required to describe any essentially would require only the the extent of the burden that such a such failures of tire outlets to act in supplementing of reports that requirement would create. accordance with the directions in the manufacturers already must file with It is possible that manufacturers could manufacturer’s plan, including an limited information about the include conditions governing tire identification of the outlet(s) in disposition of recalled tires.
VerDate 11
We estimate that the additional B. Regulatory Flexibility Act saw and blade. We believe that many economic impact of this rule upon We have also considered the impacts dealers already own such equipment manufacturers would be small. of this notice under the Regulatory and that therefore the maximum Manufacturers already assume the costs Flexibility Act. For the reasons aggregate one-time cost would be far of the tire recalls that they conduct. discussed above under E.O. 12866 and lower. Also, we note that, because not They already are required by our the DOT Policies and Procedures, I every dealer is involved in a tire recall regulations to notify dealers of recalls certify that this proposed rule would not every year, the aggregate one-time cost and to file plans and quarterly reports have a significant economic impact on would be incurred over a multi-year about their recalls with our Office of a substantial number of small entities. time period. Defects Investigation (ODI). The The primary impact of this proposed C. National Environmental Policy Act additional notification and reporting rule would be felt by the major tire elements that this rule would add We have reviewed this proposal for manufacturers, which are not small the purposed of compliance with the would be very limited and wholly entities. This impact would be minor, descriptive. They would not impose National Environmental Policy Act (42 since it primarily would involve adding U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined that significant costs on manufacturers. a description of plans for incapacitating In general, the radial tires that are in it would not have a significant impact and disposing of recalled noncompliant on the quality of the human widespread use today are far safer than or defective tires to their remedy older technology tires and are subject to environment. The proposed rule would programs, notifying affected retail not require manufacturers to conduct few significant recalls. Although the two outlets of the plans, and providing any recalls beyond those that they recalls recently conducted by minimal reporting on the plans in the already are required to conduct. The Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. of Firestone quarterly reports that manufacturers sale of recalled tires is prohibited by ATX and Wilderness AT tires were very already must file with NHTSA. We other provisions in the Safety Act. large, this is unusual. In the 1980s and estimate this cost at $1.00 per tire Disposal requirements are already 1990s, there were relatively few recalls manufacturer per affected retail outlet, governed by other State laws and of large numbers of tires. In the past five but the cost could well be less because regulations. years, the average number of tire recalls manufacturers may already be including per year was five, the average such descriptions in their notices to D. Paperwork Reduction Act population of recalled tires per year was dealers. This proposed rule would impose 28,389, and the average recall involved Disposal requirements would be new collection of information burdens 5,678 tires, excluding the governed by applicable State and local within the meaning of the Paperwork aforementioned Bridgestone/Firestone laws and regulations. It is likely that Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. recalls and a Cooper Tire recall (No. manufacturers and entities that replace chapter 35). However, those burdens 99T–005), which covered only two (2) tires already are complying with should be minimal. Manufacturers tires. (This excludes recalls to correct applicable requirements for tire already are required by our regulations labeling errors.) Therefore, we do not disposal. If not, manufacturers, who we to file plans and quarterly reports about anticipate that there will be large understand currently pay for tire recalls, tire recalls with our ODI. There would numbers of tire recalls for which would incur the costs associated with be an incremental burden of adding to manufacturers would be required to file tire disposal, e.g. the costs of their descriptions of their programs. programs and plans under our proposed transporting disabled tires and the costs Even this impact would be minor, since rule. of recycling the tires. We estimate these it only would involve adding a Finally, this rule essentially would costs at approximately $1.00 per tire for description of plans for incapacitating require manufacturers to take steps to transportation and $2.00 per tire for and disposing of recalled noncomplying facilitate compliance by entities that recycling. or defective tires to their remedy replace recalled tires with applicable This proposed rule could also have an programs and providing minimal state and local laws regarding tire impact on the nation’s 3,500 tire reporting on the plans in the quarterly disposition. Since it is likely that these dealers, many of which are small reports that manufacturers already must entities already comply with applicable entities. If they do not comply with file with NHTSA. The additional requirements for disposal of returned applicable requirements for tire reporting elements that this proposed tires, this rule would not add any disposal, manufacturer-controlled tire rule would require of manufacturers and substantive burdens or compliance dealers would incur the costs of of manufacturer-controlled outlets that costs. Even in the unlikely event of monthly ‘‘exceptions reporting’’ to implement recalls, i.e. periodic complete disregard of applicable manufacturers of any instances in which ‘‘exceptions reporting’’ of aggregate disposal requirements (in which case the dealer did not comply with the numbers of recalled tires that have not 100% of the cost of compliance might manufacturer’s plan for disposing of been incapacitated for use or that have be viewed as a cost of this rule), the recalled tires. We estimate these been disposed of unlawfully, describing additional costs for recycling 100% of reporting costs at $1.00 per affected any failure to comply with the the tires recalled annually would be dealer per recall. Each dealer could also manufacturer’s plan to render tires $141,945 for the tire industry as a incur a one-time cost for obtaining unsuitable for installation on a motor whole, or $28,390 per average tire recall equipment to incapacitate tires so that vehicle for resale and any failure to (assuming 28,389 tires recalled the tires cannot be resold to the public. comply with the disposal requirements annually, or 5,678 tires recalled per The one time-cost would likely range of applicable state and local laws and average tire recall, multiplied by $5.00 between $70.00 (to purchase a power regulations of which the manufacturer (including $2.00 to incapacitate each drill and a drill bit) and $95.00 (to becomes aware, would be very limited recalled tire, $1.00 to collect each purchase a cutoff saw and blade(s)) per and primarily descriptive. We believe recalled tire, and $2.00 to recycle each affected dealer, or a maximum of that compliance with the proposed rule recalled tire)). For these reasons, we between $245,000 and $332,500, would not impose significant additional believe that the additional economic assuming that each of the 3,500 dealers costs or burdens either on the effect of this rule would be minimal. purchases a new drill and bit or cutoff manufacturers that conduct the tire
VerDate 11
recalls or on the manufacturer- G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of • Tell us which parts of the rule you controlled outlets that implement them. 1995 support, as well as those with which In furtherance of the recognition in The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act you disagree. • Provide specific examples to section 7 that the manufacturer’s ability of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) requires illustrate your concerns. to influence the recalls will vary agencies to prepare a written assessment according to the degree to which it • Offer specific alternatives. of the cost, benefits and other effects of • Refer your comments to specific controls the outlets that carry out the proposed or final rules that include a recalls, we do not propose to require sections of the rule, such as the units or Federal mandate likely to result in the page numbers of the preamble, or the even this limited ‘‘exceptions reporting’’ expenditure by State, local or tribunal by manufacturers with respect to outlets regulatory sections. governments, in the aggregate, or by the • Be sure to include the name, date, that the manufacturer does not control. private sector, of more than $100 Because this proposed rule would and docket number with your million annually. Because this rule comments. impose information collection would not have a $100 million annual requirements, albeit minimal, as that effect, no Unfunded Mandates B. How Do I Prepare and Submit term is defined by the Office of assessment is necessary and one will Comments? Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 not be prepared. Your comments must be written and CFR part 1329, we plan to submit the in English. To ensure that your proposed requirements to OMB for its H. Plain Language comments are correctly filed in the approval, as required by the PRA. We Executive Order 12866 and the Docket, please include the docket seek comments on the information President’s memorandum of June 1, number of this document in your collection burdens associated with this 1998, require each agency to write all comments. proposed rule. rules in plain language. Application of Your comments must not be more E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) the principles of plain language than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21.) We includes consideration of the following established this limit to encourage you Executive Order 13132 on questions: to write your primary comments in a ‘‘Federalism’’ requires us to develop an —Have we organized the material to suit concise fashion. However, you may accountable process to ensure the public’s needs? attach necessary additional documents ‘‘meaningful and timely input’’ by State —Are the requirements in the rule to your comments. There is no limit on and local officials in the development of clearly stated? the length of the attachments. ‘‘regulatory policies that have —Does the rule contain technical Please submit two copies of your federalism implications.’’ The E.O. language or jargon that is not clear? comments, including the attachments, defines this phrase to include —Would a different format (grouping to Docket Management at the address regulations ‘‘that have substantial direct and order of sections, use of headings, given above under ADDRESSES. effects on the States, on the relationship paragraphing) make the rule easier to Comments may also be submitted to between the national government and understand? the docket electronically by logging onto the States, or on the distribution of —Would more (but shorter) sections be the Docket Management System website power and responsibilities among the better? at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on ‘‘Help & various levels of government.’’ This —Could we improve clarity by adding Information’’ or ‘‘Help/Info’’ to obtain proposed rule, which would require that tables, lists, or diagrams? instructions for filing the document manufacturers include a plan for —What else could we do to make the electronically. disposal of recalled tires in their remedy rule easier to understand? programs under either section 30118(b) C. How can I be Sure That my or 30118(c) of the Safety Act, will not If you have any responses to these Comments Were Received? have substantial direct effect on the questions, please include them in your comments on this rule. If you wish Docket Management to States, on the relationship between the notify you upon its receipt of your national government and the States, or IV. Submission of Comments. comments, enclose a self-addressed, on the distribution of power and stamped postcard in the envelope responsibilities among the various A. How Can I Influence NHTSA’s Thinking on This Rule? containing your comments. Upon levels of government, as specified in receiving your comments, Docket E.O. 13132. This rulemaking does not In developing this notice of proposed Management will return the postcard by have those implications because it rulemaking, we tried to address the mail. applies directly only to manufacturers anticipated concerns of all our who are required to file a remedy plan stakeholders. Your comments will help D. How do I Submit Confidential under sections 30118(b) or 30118(c), us decide what to include in the rule Business Information? rather than to the States or local and to improve the proposed rule. We If you wish to submit any information governments, and because it directs invite you to provide different views on under a claim of confidentiality, you manufacturers to file plans that conform it, new approaches we have not should submit three copies of your with applicable state and/or local considered, new data, how this rule may complete submission, including the requirements. affect you, or other relevant information. information you claim to be confidential Your comments will be most effective if business information, to the Chief F. Civil Justice Reform you follow the suggestions below: Counsel (NCC–30), NHTSA, at the This proposed rule would not have a Explain your views and reasoning as address given above under FOR FURTHER retroactive or preemptive effect. Judicial clearly as possible. INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you review of the rule may be obtained • Provide solid information to should submit two copies, from which pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 702. That section support your views. you have deleted the claimed does not require that a petition for • If you estimate potential numbers or confidential business information, to reconsideration be filed prior to seeking reports or costs, explain how you Docket Management at the address judicial review. arrived at the estimate. given above under ADDRESSES. When
VerDate 11
you send a comment containing List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 573: manufacturer’s program must, at a information claimed to be confidential Defects, Motor vehicle safety, minimum, include the following: business information, you should Noncompliance, Reporting and (1) Written directions to include a cover letter setting forth the recordkeeping requirements, Tires. manufacturer-owned and other information specified in our In consideration of the foregoing, manufacturer-controlled outlets to alter confidential business information NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR part the recalled tires permanently so that regulation. (49 CFR part 512.) 573 as set forth below. they cannot be used on vehicles, and instructions on how and when to E. Will the Agency Consider Late 1. The authority citation for part 573 perform such alterations. These shall Comments? continues to read as follows: include instructions on the means to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30102–103, 30112, render recalled tires unsuitable for We will consider all comments that 30117–121, 30166–167; delegation of Docket Management receives before the authority at 49 CFR 1.50. resale for installation on motor vehicles close of business on the comment 2. In § 573.5, redesignate paragraphs and instructions to perform the closing date indicated above under (c)(9) through (c)(11) as paragraphs incapacitation of each recalled tire by DATES. To the extent possible, we will (c)(10) through (c)(12) and by add a new the close of business on the day on also consider comments that Docket paragraph (c)(9) to read as follows: which recalled tire has been removed Management receives after that date. If from the vehicle; Docket Management receives a comment § 573.5 Defect and noncompliance (2) Written guidance to all other information report. too late for us to consider it in outlets that are authorized to replace the developing a final rule (assuming that * * * * * recalled tires on how to alter the one is issued), we will consider that (c) * * * recalled tires promptly and permanently (9) In the case of a remedy program comment as an informal suggestion for so that they cannot be used on vehicles; involving the replacement of tires, the future rulemaking action. and manufacturer’s program for remedying (3) A requirement that manufacturer- F. How can I Read the Comments the defect or noncompliance shall: owned and other manufacturer- (i) Include a plan for assuring that the Submitted by Other People and Other controlled outlets report to the entities replacing the tires are aware of Materials Relevant to this Rulemaking? manufacturer on a monthly basis the the legal requirements related to recalls number of recalled tires removed from You may view the materials in the of tires established by 49 U.S.C. Chapter vehicles by the outlet that have not been docket for this rulemaking on the 301, including regulations thereunder; Internet. These materials include (ii) Address how the manufacturer rendered unsuitable for resale for background information on the use of will prevent, to the extent reasonably installation on a motor vehicle within tires in landfills and written comments within its control, the recalled tires from the specified time frame and describe submitted by other interested persons. being resold for installation on a motor any such failure to comply with the You may read them at the address given vehicle; and manufacturer=s plan; above under ADDRESSES. The hours of (iii) Address how the manufacturer (C) With respect to the requirement in the Docket are indicated above in the will limit, to the extent reasonably paragraph (c)(9)(iii) of this section, the same location. within its control, the disposal of the manufacturer’s program must, at a minimum, include the following: You may also see the comments and recalled tires in landfills and, instead, channel them into a category of positive (1) Written directions that require materials on the Internet. To read them manufacturer-owned and other on the Internet, take the following steps: reuse (shredding, crumbling, recycling, and recovery) or another alternative manufacturer-controlled outlets to (1) Go to the Docket Management beneficial non-vehicular use. comply with applicable state and local System (DMS) Web page of the (A) With respect to the requirement in laws and regulations regarding disposal Department of Transportation (http:// paragraph (c)(9)(i) of this section, at a of tires, and that provide further dms.dot.gov/). minimum, the manufacturer shall notify direction and guidance to manufacturer- (2) On that page, click on ‘‘search.’’ its owned stores, franchised dealers, owned and other manufacturer- controlled outlets on how to limit the (3) On the next page (http:// and/or distributors, as well as all disposal of recalled tires in landfills dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the four- independent outlets that are authorized and, instead, channel them into a digit docket number shown at the to replace the tires that are the subject category of positive reuse (shredding, beginning of this document. Example: If of the recall, about the prohibitions and crumbling, recycling, and recovery) or the docket number were ‘‘NHTSA– notification requirements in Chapter another alternative beneficial non- 2000–1234,’’ you would type ‘‘1234.’’ 301. This includes notification of the vehicular use; After typing the docket number, click on ban on the sale of new defective or ‘‘search.’’ noncompliant tires (49 U.S.C. 30120(i)); (2) Written guidance to all other the prohibition on the sale of new and outlets that are authorized to replace the (4) On the next page, which contains used defective and noncompliant tires recalled tires regarding the duty to docket summary information for the (49 U.S.C. 30120(j)); and the duty to comply with applicable state and local materials in the docket you selected, notify NHTSA of any sale of a new or laws and regulations regarding disposal click on the desired comments. You used recalled tire for use on a motor of tires; and may download the comments. vehicle (49 U.S.C. 30166(n)). For tire (3) A requirement that manufacturer- Please note that even after the outlets that are manufacturer-owned or owned and other manufacturer- comment closing date, we will continue otherwise subject to the control of the controlled outlets report to the to file relevant information in the manufacturer, the manufacturer shall manufacturer on a monthly basis the Docket as it becomes available. Further, also provide directions to comply with number of recalled tires disposed of in some people may submit late comments. these statutory provisions and the violation of applicable laws and Accordingly, we recommend that you regulations thereunder. regulations. Each such report shall periodically check the Docket for new (B) With respect to the requirement in include a description of any such failure material. paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this section, the of the tire outlet to act in accordance
VerDate 11
with the directions in the accordance with its terms constitutes a NHTSA pursuant to § 573.5(c)(9) of this manufacturer’s plan. violation of the Safety Act. part; (D) As used in this paragraph, written * * * * * (ii) The aggregate number of recalled directions to a manufacturer-owned or 3. In § 573.6, add paragraph (b)(7) to tires which the manufacturer becomes controlled outlet shall be sent to the read as follows: aware have been disposed of in violation of applicable state and local person in charge of each outlet with § 573.6 Quarterly reports. laws and regulations; and further instructions to notify all (iii) A description of any failure of a employees of the outlet who are * * * * * (b) * * * tire outlet to act in accordance with the involved with removal, rendering directions in the manufacturer’s plan, (7) For all recalls that involve the unsuitable for use, or disposition of including an identification of the outlets replacement of tires, the manufacturer recalled tires of the above requirements. in question. shall provide (E) Manufacturers must implement Issued on: December 11, 2001. the plans for disposition of recalled tires (i) The aggregate number of recalled tires which the manufacturer becomes Kenneth N. Weinstein, that they file with NHTSA pursuant to aware have not been rendered Associate Administrator for Safety this paragraph. The failure of a unsuitable for resale for installation on Assurance. manufacturer to implement its plan in a motor vehicle in accordance with the [FR Doc. 01–30998 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] manufacturer’s plan provided to BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate 11
Notices Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 243
Tuesday, December 18, 2001
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Child Nutrition Programs an contains documents other than rules or Chisholm, Forest Supervisor and opportunity to comment on their proposed rules that are applicable to the Designated Federal Officer, at (530) current usage of FNIC resources and the public. Notices of hearings and investigations, 233–8700; or Public Affairs Officer types of resources that are of greatest committee meetings, agency decisions and Nancy Gardner at (530) 233–8713. value to them. This information will rulings, delegations of authority, filing of assist FNIC staff in continually petitions and applications and agency Dan Chisholm, improving its resources to meet the statements of organization and functions are Forest Supervisor. examples of documents appearing in this usage patterns and needs of this target section. [FR Doc. 01–31108 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] audience. BILLING CODE 3410–11–M FNIC does not have a formal means of determining the use of FNIC resources DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (including the website) by personnel at DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE schools receiving USDA funds for Child Forest Service National Agricultural Library Nutrition Programs. To collect this information, FNIC proposes to provide Notice of Resource Advisory attendees of selected education related Committee Meeting Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To Collect Information conferences with a password to access AGENCY: Modoc Resource Advisory a one-time, voluntary, electronic FNIC AGENCY: National Agricultural Library, Resources usage survey. The Committee, Alturas, California, USDA Agricultural Research Service, USDA. Forest Service. information collected from this survey ACTION: Notice and request for will be used to evaluate current FNIC ACTION: Notice of meetings. comments. resources and assist in planning and managing future projects. The SUMMARY: SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in In accordance with the Utilization of FNIC Resources Survey is the Federal Advisory Committees Act Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. comprised of seven questions where (Pub. L. 92–463) and under the Secure L. 104–13) and Office of Management customers report on their use of FNIC Rural Schools and Community Self- and Budget (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR resources. Some examples of survey Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106– part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, components include: ‘‘Please rate the 393) the Modoc National Forest’s Modoc 1995), this notice announces the usefulness of the following FNIC Resource Advisory Committee will meet National Agricultural Library’s intent to resources’’ and ‘‘How often do you think Saturday, January 12, 2002 and request approval for new information you will use FNIC resources in the next Saturday, February 9, 2002 in Alturas, collection from personnel at schools 12 months?’’ The survey also asks for California for business meetings. The receiving USDA funds for Child customers to report which websites they meetings are open to the public. Nutrition Programs. are currently accessing for nutrition SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DATES: Comments on this notice must be information as well as to provide any business meeting January 12 begins at received by February 21, 2002, to be additional comments they deem 9:30 am, at the Modoc National Forest assured of consideration. appropriate. Office, Conference Room, 800 West 12th ADDRESSES: Address all comments Estimate of Burden: Public reporting St., Alturas. Agenda topics will include concerning this notice to Elizabeth Hill, burden for this collection of information approval of 11/17/01 minutes, reports Nutrition Information Specialist Food is estimated to average 15 minutes per from subcommittees are review and and Nutrition Information Center /NAL/ response. selection of projects that will improve ARS/USDA 10301 Baltimore Ave. Rm Respondents: Educators and related the maintenance of existing 105, Beltsville, MD 20705–2351. Submit personnel involved in child nutrition infrastructure, implement stewardship electronic comments to and child nutrition education. objectives that enhance forest [email protected]. Respondents will be recruited at ecosystems, and restore and improve FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: education related conferences. health and water quality. Opportunity Elizabeth Hill, 301–504–6415. Estimated Number of Respondents: for public discussion will be accepted SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 250 per year. following each proposal but limited to Title: Utilization of Food and Estimated Total Annual Burden on a set time. Time will also be set aside Nutrition Information Center (FNIC) Respondents: 63 hours total. Comments for public comments at the close of the Resources by Personnel at Schools are invited on (a) Whether the proposed meeting. The business meeting February Receiving USDA Funds for Child collection of information is necessary 9, begins at 9:30 a.m, at the Modoc Nutrition Programs. for the proper performance of the National Forest Office, Conference OMB Number: Not yet assigned. functions of the agency, including Room, 800 West 12th Street, Alturas. Expiration Date: N/A. whether the information will have Agenda topics will include approval of Type of Request: Approval for new practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the the 12/1/01 minutes, reports from data collection. agency’s estimate of the burden of the subcommittees and selection of projects Abstract: The collection of proposed collection of information, on the Modoc National Forest that meet information using a one-time, voluntary including the validity of the the intent of Pub. L. 106–393. Time will customer survey regarding utilization of methodology and the assumptions used; be set aside for public comments at the FNIC resources will provide personnel (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, close of the meeting. in schools receiving USDA funds for and clarity of the information to be
VerDate 11
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the intermediary relending program loans, Copies of this information collection burden of the collection of information rural housing site loans, and business can be obtained from Tracy Gillin, on those who respond, including the and industry direct loans are authorized Regulations and Paperwork use of appropriate automated, by various sections of the Consolidated Management Branch, at (202) 692–0039. electronic, mechanical, or other Farm and Rural Development Act, (7 Comments technology. Comments should be sent to U.S.C. 1921 et seq.), as amended. The the address in the preamble. All water and waste program provides loan Comments are invited on: (a) Whether responses to this notice will be funds for water and waste projects the proposed collection of information summarized and included in the request serving rural communities. Community is necessary for the proper performance for Office of Management and Budget facilities loans assist rural communities of the functions of the Agency, (OMB) approval. All comments will to develop facilities that are essential for including whether the information will become a matter of public record. their communities. The rural housing have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of Dated: November 14, 2001. site loans provide financing for the the Agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information Maria Pisa, purchase and development of housing sites for low- and moderate-income including the validity of the Acting Director, National Agricultural methodology and assumptions used; (c) Library. families. The intermediary relending program provides loans to intermediary ways to enhance the quality, utility and [FR Doc. 01–31128 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] organizations to establish revolving loan clarity of the information to be BILLING CODE 3410–03–P funds that assist with rural economic collected; and (d) ways to minimize the and community development. The burden of the collection of information DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE direct business and industry direct loan on those who are to respond, including program provides funds to rural through the use of appropriate Rural Business-Cooperative Service businesses that cannot get adequate automated, electronic, mechanical, or financing from other sources. other technological collection Rural Housing Service OMB Circular A–129, ‘‘Policies for techniques or other forms of information Federal Credit Programs and Non-Tax technology. Comments may be sent to Rural Utilities Service Receivables’’ requires that an agency Tracy Gillin, Regulations and will inform its loan applicants of the Paperwork Management Branch, U.S. Notice of Request for Extension of a Federal government’s debt collection Department of Agriculture, Rural Currently Approved Information policies and procedures prior to Development, STOP 0742, 1400 Collection extending credit. The Circular states Independence Ave. SW., Washington, that further information on the DC 20250–0742. AGENCIES: Rural Business-Cooperative implementation of credit management All responses to this notice will be Service, Rural Housing Service, and summarized and included in the request Rural Utilities Service, USDA. and debt collection can be found in the Treasury Financial Manual. A for OMB approval. All comments will ACTION: Proposed collection; comments supplement to the Treasury Financial also become a matter of public record. requested. Manual requires that the Agency will Dated: December 5, 2001. SUMMARY: In accordance with the ask the applicant to sign a debt Hilda Gay Legg, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this collection certification statement to Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. notice announces the Agencies’ certify knowledge of the Government’s intention to request an extension for a policies. This certification statement Dated: December 7, 2001. currently approved information details the consequences of delinquency John Rosso, collection in support of Form RD 1910– on Federal loans. Acting Administrator, Rural Business- 11, ‘‘Application Certification, Federal The Agencies will use Form RD 1910– Cooperative Service. 11 to meet the requirements of OMB Collection Policies for Consumer or Dated: December 7, 2001. Commercial Debts.’’ Circular A–129 and the supplement to the Treasury Financial Manual for the James. C. Alsop, DATES: Comments on this notice must be Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service. received by February 19, 2002, to be identified programs. This form will [FR Doc. 01–31054 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] assured of consideration. uniformly advise applicants of the debt collection methods that will be used in BILLING CODE 3410–XY–U FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Richard Kelly, Chief, Program recovering delinquent or defaulted Operations Branch, Water Programs loans. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Division, Rural Utilities Service, USDA, Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information STOP 1570, 1400 Independence Bureau of Export Administration Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– is estimated to average .25 hours per response. 1570, telephone (202) 720–9589. Competitive Enhancement Needs Respondents: Business or other for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Assessment Survey Program Title: Form RD 1910–11, ‘‘Application profit organizations, not-for-profit Certification, Federal Collection Policies institutions, public organizations and ACTION: Notice and request for for Consumer or Commercial Debts.’’ local or tribal governments. comments. OMB Number: 0575–0127. Estimated Number of Respondents: Expiration Date of Approval: March 1,625. SUMMARY: The Department of 31, 2002. Estimated Number of Responses per Commerce, as part of its continuing Type of Request: Extension of a Respondent: 1. effort to reduce paperwork and currently approved information Estimated Number of Responses: respondent burden, invites the general collection. 1,625. public and other Federal agencies to Abstract: The water and waste loans, Estimated Total Annual Burden on take this opportunity to comment on community facilities loans, Respondents: 406 hours. proposed and/or continuing information
VerDate 11
collections, as required by the IV. Request for Comments 14th & Constitution Avenue, NW., Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Washington, DC, 20230. Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. the proposed collection of information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 3506(c)(2)(A)). is necessary for the proper performance I. Abstract DATES: Written comments must be of the functions of the agency, including submitted on or before February 19, whether the information shall have BXA is revising the EAR to implement 2002. practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the sanctions against India and Pakistan by agency’s estimate of the burden ADDRESSES: setting forth a licensing policy of denial Direct all written comments (including hours and cost) of the to Madeleine Clayton, DOC Paperwork for exports and reexports of items proposed collection of information; (c) controlled for nuclear nonproliferation Clearance Officer, (202) 482–3129, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Department of Commerce, Room 6086, and missile technology reasons to India clarity of the information to be and Pakistan, with limited exceptions. 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Washington, DC 20230. burden of the collection of information II. Method of Collection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: on respondents, including through the Requests for additional information or Submitted, as required, on form BXA– use of automated collection techniques 748P. copies of the information collection or other forms of information instrument(s) and instructions should technology. III. Data be directed to Dawnielle Battle, BXA Comments submitted in response to ICB Liaison, (202) 482–0637, this notice will be summarized and/or OMB Number: 0694–0111. Department of Commerce, Room 6881, included in the request for OMB Form Number: BXA748–P. 14th & Constitution Avenue, NW., approval of this information collection; Type of Review: Regular submission Washington, DC, 20230. they will also become a matter of public for extension of a currently approved SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: record. collection. I. Abstract Dated: December 13, 2001. Affected Public: Individuals, Madeleine Clayton, businesses or other for-profit and not- The Defense Production Act of 1950, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, for-profit institutions. as amended, and Executive Order Office of the Chief Information Officer. Estimated Number of Respondents: 12919, authorizes the Secretary of [FR Doc. 01–31129 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 57. Commerce to assess the capabilities of BILLING CODE 3510–JT–P the defense industrial base to support Estimated Time Per Response: 40 to the national defense and to develop 45 minutes per response. policy alternatives to improve the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Estimated Total Annual Burden international competitiveness of specific Hours: 52 hours. domestic industries and their abilities to Bureau of Export Administration Estimated Total Annual Cost: No meet defense program needs. The start-up capital expenditures. information collected from voluntary India and Pakistan Sanctions surveys will be used to assist small and IV. Request for Comments ACTION: medium-sized firms in defense Proposed collection; comment request. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether transition and in gaining access to the proposed collection of information advanced technologies and SUMMARY: The Department of is necessary for the proper performance manufacturing processes available from Commerce, as part of its continuing of the functions of the agency, including Federal Laboratories. The goal is to effort to reduce paperwork and whether the information shall have improve regions of the country respondent burden, invites the general practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the adversely affected by cutbacks in public and other Federal agencies to agency’s estimate of the burden defense spending and military base take this opportunity to comment on (including hours and cost) of the closures. proposed and/or continuing information proposed collection of information; (c) II. Method of Collection collections, as required by the ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, clarity of the information to be Survey. Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. collected; and (d) ways to minimize the III. Data 3506(c)(2)(A)). burden of the collection of information DATES: Written comments must be on respondents, including through the OMB Number: 0694–0083. use of automated collection techniques Form Number: None. submitted on or before February 19, 2002. or other forms of information Type of Review: Regular submission technology. for extension of a currently approved ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Comments submitted in response to collection. to Madeleine Clayton, DOC Paperwork this notice will be summarized and/or Affected Public: Individuals, Clearance Officer, (202) 482–3129, included in the request for OMB businesses or other for-profit and not- Department of Commerce, Room 6086, approval of this information collection; for-profit institutions. 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., they will also become a matter of public Estimated Number of Respondents: Washington, DC 20230. record. 5,000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Estimated Time Per Response: 30 Requests for additional information or Dated: December 13, 2001. minutes per response. copies of the information collection Madeleine Clayton, Estimated Total Annual Burden instrument(s) and instructions should Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Hours: 2,500. be directed to Ms. Dawnielle Battle, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Estimated Total Annual Cost: No BXA ICB Liaison, (202) 482–0637, [FR Doc. 01–31130 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] start-up capital expenditures. Department of Commerce, Room 6881, BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE investigation pursuant to section Schedule of the United States (see 351.205(b)(2) of the regulations and Federal Register notice 65 FR 82328, International Trade Administration section 733 (c)(1)(B)(i)(II) of the Act. published on December 28, 2000). Also [A–337–806] This further postponement is necessary see 65 FR 69910, published on to provide additional time for the November 21, 2000. Notice of Postponement of Preliminary Department to consider novel cost D. Michael Hutchinson, Antidumping Duty Determination: IQF issues involved in this case. Because of Red Raspberries From Chile this extraordinary complication, we are Acting Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements. postponing the preliminary AGENCY: Import Administration, determination until no later than Committee for the Implementation of Textile International Trade Administration, December 20, 2001. Agreements Department of Commerce. This notice is published pursuant to December 12, 2001. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce sections 733(c) and 777(i) of the Act. Commissioner of Customs, is extending the time limit for the Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC preliminary determination in the Dated: December 12, 2001. Faryar Shirzad, 20229. antidumping duty investigation on Dear Commissioner: This directive individually quick frozen red Assistant Secretary for Import amends, but does not cancel, the directive raspberries from Chile. Administration. issued to you on November 15, 2000, by the EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–31163 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements. That directive FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cole BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P concerns imports of certain cotton, man- Kyle (202) 482–1503 or Annika O’Hara made fiber, silk blend and other vegetable (202) 482–3798; Import Administration, COMMITTEE FOR THE fiber textiles and textile products, produced International Trade Administration, or manufactured in Bangladesh and exported U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE during the twelve-month period which began Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., AGREEMENTS on January 1, 2001 and extends through Washington, DC 20230. December 31, 2001. Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain Effective on December 19, 2001, you are Applicable Statute and Regulations Cotton, Man-Made Fiber, Silk Blend directed to adjust the limits for the following Unless otherwise indicated, all and Other Vegetable Fiber Textile categories, as provided for under the Uruguay citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as Products Produced or Manufactured in Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing: amended (the Act), are references to the Bangladesh Category Adjusted twelve-month provisions effective January 1, 1995, the December 12, 2001. limit 1 effective date of the amendments made AGENCY: Committee for the to the Act by the Uruguay Round Implementation of Textile Agreements 237 ...... 469,994 dozen. Agreements Act. In addition, unless (CITA). 335 ...... 157,989 dozen. otherwise indicated, all citations to the 341 ...... 3,285,686 dozen Department of Commerce’s (the ACTION: Issuing a directive to the 635 ...... 513,819 dozen. Department’s) regulations are to 19 CFR Commissioner of Customs adjusting 847 ...... 426,670 dozen. limits. part 351 (April 2001). 1 The limits have not been adjusted to ac- count for any imports exported after December Postponement of Preliminary EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2001. 31, 2000. Determinations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross The Committee for the Implementation of On June 6, 2001, the Department Arnold, International Trade Specialist, Textile Agreements has determined that published the initiation of the Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. these actions fall within the foreign affairs antidumping duty investigation of Department of Commerce, (202) 482– exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5 imports of individually quick frozen 4212. For information on the quota U.S.C. 553(a)(1). (IQF) red raspberries from Chile. The status of these limits, refer to the Quota Sincerely, notice of initiation stated that we would Status Reports posted on the bulletin D. Michael Hutchinson, make our preliminary determination for boards of each Customs port, call (202) Acting Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements. this antidumping duty investigation no 927–5850, or refer to the U.S. Customs later than 140 days after the date of website at http://www.customs.gov. For [FR Doc. 01–31093 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] issuance of the initiation (i.e., November information on embargoes and quota re- BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S 7, 2001). See Notice of Initiation of openings, refer to the Office of Textiles Antidumping Duty Investigations: IQF and Apparel website at http:// COMMITTEE FOR THE Red Raspberries from Chile, 66 FR otexa.ita.doc.gov. IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE 34407 (June 28, 2001). At the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGREEMENTS petitioners’ 1 request, the Department postponed the preliminary Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); Adjustment of an Import Limit for determination to December 12, 2001. Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as Certain Man-Made Fiber Textiles See Notice of Postponement of amended. Produced or Manufactured in Romania Preliminary Antidumping Duty Determination: IQF Red Raspberries The current limits for certain December 12, 2001. from Chile, 66 FR 53775 (October 24, categories are being adjusted for swing AGENCY: Committee for the 2001). and special shift. Implementation of Textile Agreements The Department is further postponing A description of the textile and (CITA). apparel categories in terms of HTS the preliminary determination in this ACTION: Issuing a directive to the numbers is available in the Commissioner of Customs adjusting a 1 The petitioners are the IQF Red Raspberries Fair CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel limit. Trade Committee and its members. Categories with the Harmonized Tariff
VerDate 11
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2001. Acting Chairman, Committee for the 20229. Implementation of Textile Agreements. Dear Commissioner: This directive FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 01–31095 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] amends, but does not cancel, the directive Naomi Freeman, International Trade issued to you on November 15, 2000, by the BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S Specialist, Office of Textiles and Chairman, Committee for the Implementation Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Textile Agreements. That directive (202) 482–4212. For information on the concerns imports of certain cotton, wool, quota status of this limit, refer to the COMMITTEE FOR THE man–made fiber, silk blend and other Quota Status Reports posted on the IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE vegetable fiber textiles and textile products, bulletin boards of each Customs port, AGREEMENTS produced or manufactured in Indonesia and call (202) 927–5850, or refer to the U.S. exported during the twelve-month period Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain which began on January 1, 2001 and extends Customs website at http:// Cotton and Man-Made Fiber Textile through December 31, 2001. www.customs.ustreas.gov. For Products Produced or Manufactured in Effective on December 18, 2001, you are information on embargoes and quota re- Indonesia directed to adjust the limits for the categories openings, refer to the Office of Textiles listed below, as provided for under the and Apparel website at http:// December 12, 2001. Uruguay Round Agreement on Textiles and otexa.ita.doc.gov. AGENCY: Committee for the Clothing: Implementation of Textile Agreements SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Twelve-month (CITA). Category 1 Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural restraint limit ACTION: Issuing a directive to the Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as Commissioner of Customs adjusting Levels in Group I amended. limits. 347/348 ...... 2,412,951 dozen. 647/648 ...... 4,468,985 dozen. The current limit for Category 604 is being increased for carryforward. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 18, 2001. 1 The limits have not been adjusted to ac- A description of the textile and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ross count for any imports exported after December apparel categories in terms of HTS Arnold, International Trade Specialist, 31, 2000. numbers is available in the Office of Textiles and Apparel, U.S. The Committee for the Implementation of CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel Department of Commerce, (202) 482– Textile Agreements has determined that Categories with the Harmonized Tariff 4212. For information on the quota these actions fall within the foreign affairs Schedule of the United States (see status of these limits, refer to the Quota exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). Federal Register notice 65 FR 82328, Status Reports posted on the bulletin boards of each Customs port, call (202) Sincerely, published on December 28, 2000). Also D. Michael Hutchinson, see 65 FR 77594, published on 927–5850, or refer to the U.S. Customs Acting Chairman, Committee for the December 12, 2000. website at http://www.customs.gov. For Implementation of Textile Agreements. information on embargoes and quota re- [FR Doc. 01–31094 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] D. Michael Hutchinson, openings, refer to the Office of Textiles BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S Acting Chairman, Committee for the and Apparel website at http:// Implementation of Textile Agreements. otexa.ita.doc.gov. Committee for the Implementation of Textile SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: COMMITTEE FOR THE Agreements Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE December 12, 2001. Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); AGREEMENTS Commissioner of Customs, Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC amended. Availability of the Correlation: Textile and Apparel Categories With the 20229. The current limit for Categories 647/ Dear Commissioner: This directive Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the amends, but does not cancel, the directive 648 is being increased for the undoing United States for 2002 issued to you on December 5, 2000, by the of special shift, reducing the limit for Chairman, Committee for the Implementation Categories 347/348 to account for the December 12, 2001. of Textile Agreements. That directive amount being returned to Categories AGENCY: Committee for the concerns imports of certain cotton, wool, 647/648. Implementation of Textile Agreements man-made fiber, silk blend and other A description of the textile and (CITA). vegetable fiber textiles and textile products apparel categories in terms of HTS ACTION: Notice. produced or manufactured in Romania and numbers is available in the exported during the twelve-month period CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: which began on January 1, 2001 and extends through December 31, 2001. Categories with the Harmonized Tariff Keith Daly, International Trade Effective on December 19, 2001, you are Schedule of the United States (see Specialist, Office of Textiles and directed to increase the current limit for Federal Register notice 65 FR 82328, Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, Category 604 to 1,945,157 kilograms 1, as published on December 28, 2000). Also (202) 482–3400. provided for under the Uruguay Round see 65 FR 69911, published on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agreement on Textiles and Clothing. November 21, 2000. Committee for the Implementation of The Committee for the Implementation of D. Michael Hutchinson, Textile Agreements (CITA) announces Textile Agreements has determined that that the 2002 Correlation, based on the these actions fall within the foreign affairs Acting Chairman, Committee for the exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5 Implementation of Textile Agreements. Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S.C. 553(a)(1). United States, will be available in Sincerely, Committee for the Implementation of Textile January 2002 as part of the Office of D. Michael Hutchinson, Agreements Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA) CD-Rom December 12, 2001. publications. 1 The limit has not been adjusted to account for Commissioner of Customs, The CD-Rom may be purchased from any imports exported after December 31, 2000. Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC the U.S. Department of Commerce,
VerDate 11
Office of Textiles and Apparel, 14th and should be addressed to the appropriate PreMDC DRGs. This resulted in all Constitution Avenue, NW., room H3100, contractor. neonate tracheostomies and organ Washington, DC 20230, ATTN: Barbara SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final transplants to be grouped to MDC 15 Anderson, at a cost of $25. Checks or rule published on September 1, 1987 (52 and not to DRGs 480–483 or 495. For money orders should be made payable FR 32992) set forth the basic procedures admissions occurring on or after to the U.S. Department of Commerce. used under the CHAMPUS DRG-based October 1, 1998, the CHAMPUS grouper The 2002 Correlation will also be payment system. This was subsequently hierarchy logic was changed to move available on the OTEXA website at amended by final rules published DRG 103 to the PreMDC DRGs and to http://otexa.ita.doc.gov. August 31, 1988 (53 FR 33461), October assign patients to PreMDC DRGs 480, 21, 1988 (53 FR 41331), December 16, 103 and 495 before assignment to MDC D. Michael Hutchinson, 1988 (53 FR 50515), May 30, 1990 (55 15 DRGs and the neonatal DRGs. For Acting Chairman, Committee for the FR 21863), October 22, 1990 (55 FR admissions occurring on or after Implementation of Textile Agreements. 42560), and September 10, 1998 (63 FR October 1, 2001, DRGs 512 and 513 [FR Doc. 01–31096 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 48439). were added to the PreMDC DRGs, BILLING CODE 3510–DR–S An explicit tenet of these final rules, between DRGs 480 and 103 in the and one based on the statute authorizing TRICARE grouper hierarchy logic. the use of DRGs by TRICARE, is that the For FY 2002, CMS will implement TRICARE DRG-based payment system is classification changes, including DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE modeled on the Medicare PPS, and that, surgical hierarchy changes. The Office of the Secretary whenever practicable, the TRICARE TRICARE Grouper will incorporate all system will follow the same rules that changes made to the Medicare Grouper. TRICARE Management Activity; Fiscal apply to the Medicare PPS. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services B. Wage Index and Medicare Year 2002 Diagnosis Related Group Geographic Classification Review Board (DRG) Updates (CMS) publishes these changes annually in the Federal Register and discusses in Guidelines AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DoD. detail the impact of the changes. TRICARE will continue to use the ACTION: Notice of DRG revised rates. In addition, this notice updates the same wage index amounts used for the rates and weights in accordance with Medicare PPS. In addition, TRICARE SUMMARY: This notice describes the our previous final rules. The actual will duplicate all changes with regard to changes made to the TRICARE DRG- changes we are making, along with a the wage index for specific hospitals based payment system in order to description of their relationship to the that are redesignated by the Medicare conform to changes made to the Medicare PPS, are detailed below. Geographic Classification Review Board. Medicare Prospective Payment System (PPS). I. Medicare PPS Changes Which Affect C. Hospital Market Basket It also provides the updated fixed loss the TRICARE DRG-Based Payment TRICARE will update the adjusted System cost outlier threshold, cost-to-charge standardized amounts according to the ratios and the Internet address for Following is a discussion of the final updated hospital market basket accessing the updated standardized changes CMS has made to the Medicare used for the Medicare PPS according to amounts and DRG relative weights to be PPS that affect the CHAMPUS DRG- CMS’s August 1, 2001, final rule. used for FY 2002 under the TRICARE based payment system. D. Outlier Payments DRG-based payment system. A. DRG Classifications EFFECTIVE DATES: Since TRICARE does not include The rates, weights and Under both the Medicare PPS and the Medicare PPS changes which affect the capital payments in our DRG-based TRICARE DRG-based payment system, payments, we will use the fixed loss TRICARE DRG-based payment system cases are classified into the appropriate contained in this notice are effective for cost outlier threshold calculated by DRG by a Grouper program. The CMS for paying cost outliers in the admissions occurring on or after Grouper classifies each case into a DRG October 1, 2001. absence of capital prospective on the basis of the diagnosis and payments. For FY 2002, the fixed loss ADDRESSES: TRICARE Management procedure codes and demographic cost outlier threshold is based on the Activity (TMA), Medical Benefits and information (that is, sex, age, and sum of the applicable DRG-based Reimbursement Systems, 16401 East discharge status). The Grouper used the payment rate plus any amounts payable Centretech Parkway, Aurora, CO 80011– TRICARE DRG-based payment system is for IDME plus a fixed dollar amount. 9066. For copies of the Federal Register the same as the current Medicare Thus, for FY 2002, in order for a case containing this notice, contact the Grouper with two modifications. The to qualify for cost outlier payments, the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. TRICARE system has replaced Medicare costs must exceed the TRICARE DRG Government Printing Office, DRG 435 with two age-based DRGs (900 base payment rate (wage adjusted) for Washington, DC 20402, (202) 783–3238. and 901), and has implemented thirty- the DRG plus the IDME payment plus The charge for the Federal Register is four (34) neonatal DRGs in place of $19,226 (wage adjusted). The marginal $10.00 for each issue payable by check Medicare DRGs 385 through 390. For cost factor for cost outliers continues to or money order to the Superintendent of admissions occurring on or after be 80 percent. Documents. October 1, 2001, DRG 435 has been FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: replaced by DRG 523. The TRICARE E. Blood Clotting Factor Marty Maxey, Medical Benefits and system has replaced DRG 523 with the For FY 2002, TRICARE will use the Reimbursement Systems, TMA, two aged-based DRGs (900 and 901). For same HCPCS codes and payment rates telephone (303) 676–3627. To obtain admissions occurring on or after for blood clotting factors used in FY copies of this document, see ADDRESSES October 1, 1995, the CHAMPUS grouper 2001, except for HCPCS code J7190 section above. Questions regarding hierarchy logic was changed so the age Factor VIII (antihemophilic factor— payment of specific claims under the split (age <29 days) and assignments to human) which has changed from $0.85 TRICARE DRG-based payment system MDC 15 occur before assignment of the per unit to $0.86 per unit. TRICARE
VerDate 11
uses the same ICD–9–CM diagnosis ACTION: Notice to Amend Systems of CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE codes as CMS for add-on payment for Records. SYSTEM: blood clotting factors. Delete from entry ‘as regular students’ SUMMARY: The Department of the Army and ‘other’. F. Indirect Medical Education (IDME) is amending three systems of records Adjustment notices in its existing inventory of CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: Passage of The Benefits Improvement records systems subject to the Privacy Delete entry and replace with and Protection Act of 2000, modified Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. ‘Individual’s name, Social Security the transition for the IDME adjustment Throughout the three notices, Number, home address, home telephone that was first established by the ‘Department of Defense Computer number, military rank, civilian grade, Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and Institute’ and ‘DODCI’’ are being branch of service, course ID, activity revised by the Balanced Budget changed to ‘Information Resources and consolidated list of students, Refinement Act of 1999. The formula Management College’ and ‘IRMC’. names, courses and their activities.’ multiplier for the TRICARE IDME DATES: This proposed action would be AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: adjustment has been revised to 1.21 for effective without further notice on Delete entry and replace with ‘10 FY 2002 and 1.02 for FY 2003 and January 17, 2002 unless comments are thereafter. U.S.C. 3013, Secretary of the Army; received which result in a contrary Army Regulation 351–1, Individual G. National Operating Standard Cost as determination. Military Education and Training; Army a Share of Total Costs ADDRESSES: Records Management Regulation 351–9, Inter-service The FY 2002 TRICARE National Division, U.S. Army Records Education and Training; and E.O. 9397 Operating Standard Cost as a Share of Management and Declassification (SSN).’ Total Costs used in calculating the cost Agency, ATTN: TAPC–PDD–RP, Stop * * * * * outlier threshold is 0.918. 5603, 6000 6th Street, Ft. Belvoir, VA RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: 22060–5603. II. Cost to Charge Ratio. Delete entry and replace with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. ‘Records are maintained for a total of 40 For FY 2002, the cost-to-charge ratio Janice Thornton at (703) 806–4390 or used for the TRICARE DRG-based years. Current file is maintained until DSN 656–4390 or Ms. Christie King at no longer needed, then retired to a payment system will be 0.5003, which (703) 806–3711 or DSN 656–3711. is increased to 0.5073 to account for bad records holding area. The records SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: debts. This shall be used to calculate the The holding area will retire the military adjusted standardized amounts and to Department of the Army systems of records to National Personnel Records calculate cost outlier payments, except records notices subject to the Privacy Center, 9700 Page Avenue, St. Louis, for children’s hospitals. For children’s Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, MO 63132–5100 when records are ten hospital cost outliers the cost-to-charge have been published in the Federal years old.’ ratio used is 0.5520. Register and are available from the * * * * * address above. III. Updated Rates and Weights The specific changes to the records RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: Delete parenthetical phrase. The updated rates and weights are system being amended are set forth accessible through the Internet at below followed by the notice, as * * * * * amended, published in its entirety. The www.tricare.osd.mil under the A0351a IRMC sequential headings TRICARE Provider proposed amendments are not within Information, Reimbursement Systems, the purview of subsection (r) of the SYSTEM NAME: Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as and DRG Information. Table 1 provides Information Resources Management amended, which requires the the ASA rates and Table 2 provides the College Record System. DRG weights to be used under the submission of a new or altered system TRICARE DRG-based payment system report. SYSTEM LOCATION: during FY 2002 and which is a result of Dated: December 12, 2001. Information Resources Management the changes described above. The L.M. Bynum, College, Washington Navy Yard, implementing regulations for the Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Washington, DC 20374–5000. TRICARE/CHAMPUS DRG-based Officer, Department of Defense. payment system are in 32 CFR part 199. CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE A0351a NDU–CI SYSTEM: Dated: December 12, 2001. All students who have completed a L.M. Bynum, SYSTEM NAME: course of instruction presented by the Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison DODCI Student Record System Information Resources Management Officer, Department of Defense. (February 22, 1993, 58 FR 10002). College (IRMC). These are primarily [FR Doc. 01–31091 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DoD military and civilian personnel; BILLING CODE 5001–08–M CHANGES: personnel from federal, state and local government agencies who have attended SYSTEM IDENTIFIER: courses on a space available basis; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Delete entry and replace with A0351a military and civilian personnel from IRMC. Department of the Army foreign governments who requested and were granted authority to attend SYSTEM NAME: Privacy Act of 1974; System of courses; and personnel from private Records Delete entry and replace with industry who are under direct contract ‘Information Resources Management to a DoD activity who sponsor their AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. College Record System’. attendance.
VerDate 11
CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE Individual’s name, Social Security Chief, Student Operations Section, SYSTEM: Number, home address, home telephone Information Resources Management All faculty members, senior staff number, military rank, civilian grade, College, Building 175, Washington Navy members, and guest lecturers currently branch of service, course ID, activity Yard, Washington, DC 20374–5000. instructing or managing at the and consolidated list of students, Information Resources Management names, courses and their activities. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: College (IRMC). All students who are Individuals seeking to determine attending or who have completed a AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: whether this system of records contains course of instruction presented by the 10 U.S.C. 3013, Secretary of the Army; information about themselves should Information Resources Management Army Regulation 351–1, Individual address written inquiries to the Chief, College. These are primarily DoD Military Education and Training; Army Student Operations Section Information military and civilian personnel as Regulation 351–9, Inter-service Resources Management College, regular students; personnel from other Education and Training; and E.O. 9397 Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, federal, state and local government (SSN). Washington, DC 20374–5000. agencies who have attended courses on PURPOSE(S): Individual should provide full name a space available basis; military and and course attended. Maintained by IRMC Student civilian personnel from foreign Operations Section to respond to RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: governments who requested and were granted authority to attend courses; and individuals requesting official Individuals seeking to access records personnel from private industry who are verification of attendance to a specific about themselves contained in this under direct contract to a DoD activity course; to respond to students, agency system of records should address who sponsor their attendance. or activity requesting official record of written inquiries to the Chief, Student training completed. Used to compile Operations Section, Information CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: statistical data of student output, e.g., Resources Management College, Biographic summary forms attendance by course, attendance by Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, individually submitted upon request by branch of service, agency or activity. Washington, DC 20374–5000. each IRMC faculty member, senior staff Statistical data is not compiled by name. Individual should provide full name member, guest lecturer, or student. ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE and course attended. Students record consists of name, rank SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: or rate, civilian grade, organization and THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: The Army rules for accessing records, division, office phone number, current In addition to those disclosures and for contesting contents and and previous job titles and positions, generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. appealing initial agency determinations number of months with present job title, 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, these records are contained in Army Regulation 340– major duties of present job, formal or information contained therein may 21; 32 CFR part 505; or may be obtained education completed, course ID, specifically be disclosed outside the from the system manager. objectives for attending IRMC course, DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 computer-related and other technical U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: training and experience, information on The DoD ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ set Enrollment and registration request usage of computers in present position, forth at the beginning of the Army’s for DoD management education and influence and authority student has over compilation of systems of records training program courses, and course design of computer-based systems notices also apply to this system. listing of students reviewed by course including security and privacy aspects, POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, manager and individual students. extent involved in planning and design RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND of teleprocessing systems. EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: Faculty/senior staff record consists of None. name, rank or rate, current and previous STORAGE: job titles and positions, former major A0351b NDU–CI Card file, paper copies forms, and duties, formal education completed, hard disk/magnetic tape. SYSTEM NAME: computer-related and other technical RETRIEVABILITY: DODCI Student/Faculty/Senior Staff training experience. Name and course ID. Biography System (February 22, 1993, AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 58 FR 10002). SAFEGUARDS: 5 U.S.C. 301, Departmental Maintained in an administrative CHANGES: Regulations. office, which is locked after normal SYSTEM IDENTIFIER: PURPOSE(S): working hours, accessible only to Delete entry and replace with ‘A0351b The student biographical summaries authorized office staff and director or IRMC’. delegate on demand. are used by course managers and * * * * * functional department heads to evaluate RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: education level, computer related work A0351b IRMC Records are maintained for a total of experience, and general computer 40 years. Current file is maintained until SYSTEM NAME: background of IRMC students. no longer needed, then retired to a IRMC Student/Faculty/Senior Staff Establishes student qualifications to records holding area. The records Biography System. attend a requested course and if course holding area will retire the military objectives have satisfied personal records to National Personnel Records SYSTEM LOCATION: objectives of students attending course. Center, 9700 Page Avenue, St. Louis, Information Resources Management Statistical summarization of information MO 63132–5100 when records are ten College, Washington Navy Yard, contained in the system provides basis years old. Washington, DC 20374–5000. for modification and revision to course
VerDate 11
content. Serves as vehicle to place NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: A0351c IRMC student into appropriate laboratory and Individuals seeking to determine SYSTEM NAME: seminar group in courses requiring such whether information about themselves IRMC Course Evaluation System. a breakout. is contained in this system should Information on faculty/senior staff address written inquiries to the Chief, SYSTEM LOCATION: members contained in the biographical Student Operations Section, Information Information Resources Management summaries is provided to students as an Resources Management College, College, Washington Navy Yard, attachment to their student notebooks. Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, DC 20374–5000. Records are used to identify faculty and Washington, DC 20374–5000. senior staff members, areas of data Individual should provide course title CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE SYSTEM: processing and information and year of attendance. management expertise for consultation All students who have completed a purposes and as an expertise preamble RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: course of instruction presented by the to the next scheduled lecturer. Individuals seeking access to Information Resources Management information about themselves contained College (IRMC). These are primarily ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE DoD military and civilian personnel as SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND in this system should address written regular students; personnel from other THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: inquiries to the Chief, Student federal, state and local government In addition to those disclosures Operations Section, Information agencies who have attended courses on generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. Resources Management College, a space available basis; military and 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, these records Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, civilian personnel from foreign or information contained therein may Washington, DC 20374–5000. governments who requested and were specifically be disclosed outside the Individual should provide course title granted authority to attend courses; and DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 and year of attendance. personnel from private industry who are U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: under direct contract to a DoD activity The DoD ‘‘Blanket Routine Uses’’ set CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: who sponsor their attendance. forth at the beginning of the Army’s The Army rules for accessing records, compilation of systems of records and for contesting contents and CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: notices also apply to this system. appealing initial agency determinations Individual student evaluation of POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, are contained in Army Regulation 340– entire course and random sampling of RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND 21; 32 CFR part 505; or may be obtained specific lecture presentations. Includes DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: from the system manager. course ID; objectives for attending course; statement concerning realization STORAGE: RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: of personal objectives, numerical or Paper records and computer hard Student biography forms are of IRMC qualitative rating of overall course, lab disk/magnetic tape. origin and completed by each sessions and/or specific lectures; list of RETRIEVABILITY: individual student. Forms are strengths and weaknesses of course; list By name for faculty/senior staff completed either the first day of the of lecture subjects of particular benefit members. Course ID and name for course or, in the case of certain specific or of little use to student; list of lecture students. courses, are mailed to the prospective subjects which should be expanded or student requesting return prior to reduced in coverage; and list of topics SAFEGUARDS: commencement of the course. not covered in course but should be Maintained in Student Operations Biographies are authorized by each included. Comments concerning course Section which is locked after normal faculty and senior staff member soon content, sequence, lecture presentation, working hours, access controlled by after arrival at IRMC. Guest lecturers are teaching techniques, audio visual aids, system manager and accessible only to requested to voluntarily submit physical facilities and administrative authorized faculty members, director or biographies for use in course notebooks. support are solicited and recorded. administration, and director or delegate Content is never changed, but in some Categories are posed as questions with on demand. cases selectively reduced in length so as ample space to encourage written not to exceed one page. Format and response to student opinion in a RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: content are generated solely by IRMC structured but non-restrictive format. All completed individual student member and are subjected only to These Course Evaluation Forms also biographical summaries are retained in editorial review. contain hard core factual information, a file folder marked by course ID and i.e., course ID, course dates, student course date. Individual student EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: name, rank/rate/grade, branch of biographical summaries are retained by None. service, duty station or agency, and course for two fiscal years preceding the present job title. fiscal year in progress. All individual A0351c NDU–CI faculty and senior staff biographical AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: summaries are retained in a master file SYSTEM NAME: 5 U.S.C. 301, Departmental folder until no longer providing services DODCI Course Evaluation System Regulations. to IRMC. Master file is reviewed (February 22, 1993, 58 FR 10002). PURPOSE(S): periodically to maintain currency. CHANGES: The system is used to evaluate course, SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: lecture, teaching techniques and SYSTEM IDENTIFIER: Chief, Student Operations Section, individual instructor effectiveness. It Information Resources Management Delete entry and replace with provides basis for modification and College, Building 175, Washington Navy ‘‘A0351c IRMC’’. revision to course content and sequence Yard, Washington, DC 20374–5000. * * * * * and lecture content. It provides input to
VerDate 11
long-range plan for course update, in this system should address written with any agency’s ability to perform its additions and revisions. The evaluation inquiries to the Chief, Student statutory obligations. The Leader, of all attendees to a particular course are Operations Section, Information Regulatory Information Management reviewed as a composite group by IRMC Resources Management College, Group, Office of the Chief Information faculty members to determine problem Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, Officer, publishes that notice containing areas, trends, and provides a continuous Washington, DC 20374–5000. proposed information collection evaluation of course effectiveness. Individual should provide course title requests prior to submission of these Routine uses of records maintained in and year of attendance. requests to OMB. Each proposed the system, including categories of users information collection, grouped by CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: and the purposes of such uses: In office, contains the following: (1) Type addition to those disclosures generally The Army rules for accessing records, of review requested, e.g. new, revision, permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the and for contesting contents and extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Privacy Act, these records or appealing initial agency determinations Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) information contained therein may are contained in Army Regulation 340– Description of the need for, and specifically be disclosed outside the 21; 32 CFR part 505; or may be obtained proposed use of, the information; (5) DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 from the system manager. Respondents and frequency of U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: collection; and (6) Reporting and/or The DoD ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ set Student course evaluation forms are Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites forth at the beginning of the Army’s public comment. compilation of systems of records of IRMC origin and distributed in class notices also apply to this system. and completed by each individual Dated: December 13, 2001. student. John Tressler, POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: Leader, Regulatory Information Management, RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND Office of the Chief Information Officer. DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: None. Student Financial Assistance STORAGE: [FR Doc. 01–31092 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Paper records and computer hard BILLING CODE 5001–08–P Type of Review: Revision. disk/magnetic tape. Title: William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) Program Electronic RETRIEVABILITY: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Debit Account Application and Course ID and student name. Brochure. Submission for OMB Review; Frequency: One time. SAFEGUARDS: Comment Request Maintained in Student Operations Affected Public: Individuals or Section Office, which is locked after AGENCY: Department of Education. household; Federal Government. normal working hours, access controlled SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour by system manager and accessible only Information Management Group, Office Burden: to authorized faculty members. Director of the Chief Information Officer invites Responses: 210,000. of Administration and Director delegate comments on the submission for OMB Burden Hours: 6,993. on demand. review as required by the Paperwork Abstract: A Direct Loan borrower uses Reduction Act of 1995. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: this application to request and authorize DATES: Interested persons are invited to the automatic deduction of monthly All completed individual evaluations submit comments on or before January student loan payments from his or her of students attending a specific course 17, 2002. checking or savings account. are retained by course ID and course ADDRESSES: Written comments should date. Individual student evaluation Requests for copies of the proposed be addressed to the Office of forms are retained by course for two information collection request may be Information and Regulatory Affairs, fiscal years preceding the fiscal year in accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or Attention: Lauren Wittenberg, Desk progress. should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Officer, Department of Education, Office Department of Education, 400 Maryland SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: of Management and Budget, 725 17th Avenue, SW, Room 4050, Regional Chief, Student Operations Section, Street, NW., Room 10202, New Office Building 3, Washington, DC Information Resources Management Executive Office Building, Washington, 20202–4651. Requests may also be College, Building 175, Washington Navy DC 20503 or should be electronically electronically mailed to the internet Yard, Washington, DC 20374–5000. mailed to the internet address address [email protected] or faxed to [email protected]. 202–708–9346. Please specify the NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section complete title of the information Individuals seeking to determine collection when making your request. whether information about themselves 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires Comments regarding burden and/or is contained in this system should the collection activity requirements address written inquiries to the Chief, that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested should be directed to Joseph Schubart at Student Operations Section, Information (202) 708–9266 or via his internet Resources Management College, Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information address [email protected]. Building 175, Washington Navy Yard, Individuals who use a Washington, DC 20374–5000. collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public telecommunications device for the deaf Individual should provide course title (TDD) may call the Federal Information and year of attendance. consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: would defeat the purpose of the 8339. Individuals seeking access to information collection, violate State or [FR Doc. 01–31118 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] information about themselves contained Federal law, or substantially interfere BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY fashion that will facilitate the orderly Tentative Agenda conduct of business. Each individual Monday, January 14, 2002 Environmental Management Site- wishing to make public comment will Specific Advisory Board, Rocky Flats be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to 3 p.m. Executive Committee Meeting present their comments. 4 p.m.–6:30 p.m. Special Work Plan AGENCY: Department of Energy. Session ACTION: Notice of open meeting. Minutes 6:30 p.m. Public Comment Session The minutes of this meeting will be 7 p.m. Committee meetings SUMMARY: This notice announces a 9 p.m Adjourn meeting of the Environmental available for public review and copying Management Site-Specific Advisory at the Public Reading Room located at Tuesday, January 15, 2002 Board (EM SSAB), Rocky Flats. The the Office of the Rocky Flats Citizens 8:30–9:30 a.m. Approval of Minutes; Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. Advisory Board, 9035 North Wadsworth Agency Updates; Recognition for L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that Parkway, Suite 2250, Westminister, CO Outgoing Board Members; Public public notice of these meeting be 80021; telephone (303)420–7855. Hours Comment Session: Facilitator announced in the Federal Register. of operations for the Public Reading Update Room are 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday– DATES: Thursday, January 10, 2002, 6 9:30–11 a.m. Waste Management p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Friday, except Federal holidays. Committee Report Minutes will also be made available by 11–12 a.m. Nuclear Materials ADDRESSES: Jefferson County Airport writing or calling Deb Thompson at the Committee Report; Public Terminal Building, Mount Evans Room, address or telephone number listed Comments 11755 Airport Way, Broomfield, CO. above. 12 noon Lunch Break FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken 1–2:30 p.m. Strategic & Long-Term Korkia, Board/Staff Coordinator, Rocky Issued at Washington, DC on December 12, 2001. Issues Committee Flats Citizens Advisory Board, 9035 2:30–3 p.m. Environmental Rachel M. Samuel, North Wadsworth Parkway, Suite 2250, Remediation Committee Westminster, CO, 80021; telephone Deputy Advisory Committee Management 3–4 p.m. Administrative Committee (303) 420–7855; fax (303) 420–7579. Officer. Report; 2002 Officer, committee [FR Doc. 01–31111 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chair and Membership Elections; BILLING CODE 6450–01–P Chairs Farewell; Public Comments Purpose of the Board 4 p.m. Adjourn The purpose of the Board is to make If needed, time will be allotted after DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY recommendations to DOE and its public comments for items added to the regulators in the areas of environmental Environmental Management Site- agenda, and administrative details. A restoration, waste management, and Specific Advisory Board, Savannah final agenda will be available at the related activities. River meeting January 14, 2002. Tentative Agenda Public Participation AGENCY: Department of Energy. 1. Quarterly update by representative The meeting is open to the public. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. from the Colorado Department of Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the Public Health and Environment SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting. Individuals who wish to make 2. Update on safety issues and recent meeting of the Environmental the oral statements pertaining to agenda safety incidents at the Rocky Flats Management Site-Specific Advisory items should contact Gerri Flemming’s site Board (EM SSAB), Savannah River. The office at the address or telephone listed 3. Presentation on review of risk Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. above. Requests must be received five calculations for Radionuclide Soil L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that days prior to the meeting and reasonable Action Levels (RSALs) public notice of these meetings be 4. Discussion regarding the Board’s provision will be made to include the announced in theFederal Register. RSAL Recommendation (No. 2001– presentation in the agenda. The Deputy 4) and DOE’s response to the DATES: Monday, January 14, 2002, 3 DesignatedFederal Officer is empowered recommendation p.m.–9:00 p.m. Tuesday, January 15, to conduct the meeting in a fashion that 5. Agree on path forward for this year’s 2002, 8:30 a.m.–4 p.m. will facilitate the orderly conduct of end-state discussions ADDRESSES: Hilton Oceanfront Hotel- business. Each individual wishing to 6. Other Board business may be Palmetto Dunes, 23 Ocean Lane,Hilton make public comment will be provided conducted as necessary Head Island, SC 29928. equal time to present their comments. Public Participation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Minutes Gerri Flemming, Science Technology & The meeting is open to the public. The minutes of this meeting will be Management Division, Department of Written statements may be filed with available for public review and copying Energy Savannah River Operations the Board either before or after the at the Freedom of Information Public Office, PO Box A, Aiken, SC 29802; meeting. Individuals who wish to make Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal Phone: (803) 725–5374. oral statements pertaining to agenda Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, items should contact Ken Korkia at the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 address or telephone number listed a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Purpose of the Board above. Requests must be received at Friday, except Federal holidays. least five days prior to the meeting and The purpose of the Board is to make Minutes will also be available by reasonable provisions will be made to recommendations to DOE and its writing to Gerri Fleming, Department of include the presentation in the agenda. regulators in the areas of environmental Energy Savannah River Operations The Deputy DesignatedFederal Officer is restoration, waste management, and Office, PO Box A, Aiken, SC 29802, or empowered to conduct the meeting in a related activities. by calling her at (803) 725–5374.
VerDate 11
Issued at Washington, DC on December 11, information from DOE and site- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2001. specific presentations and develop Rachel M. Samuel, statements for consideration from Energy Information Administration Deputy Advisory Committee Management the group. Officer. 3:45–4 p.m. Break Agency information collection [FR Doc. 01–31112 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 4–5 p.m. Plenary Session—Reports activities: Submission for emergency OMB review; comment request BILLING CODE 6450–01–P from Core Topic Breakout Groups 5 p.m Adjourn AGENCY: Energy Information Saturday, February 2 Administration (EIA), Department of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy (DOE). 8–8:15 a.m. Plenary Session ACTION: Agency Information Collection Environmental Management Site- 8:15–9:15 a.m. Site-Specific Breakout Specific Advisory Board Chairs Activities: Submission for Emergency Session—Delegations will discuss OMB Review; Comment Request. Meeting statements developed by the core SUMMARY: The EIA has submitted the AGENCY: Department of Energy. topic breakout groups. 9:15–10:30 a.m. Core Topic Breakout energy information collection listed at ACTION: Notice of open meeting. Sessions—Groups will refine their the end of this notice to the Office of SUMMARY: This notice announces a statements. Management and Budget (OMB) for meeting of the Environmental 10:30–10:45 a.m. Break emergency processing under section Management Site-Specific Advisory 10:45–11:45 a.m. Final Plenary 3507(j)(1) of the Paperwork Reduction Board (EM SSAB) Chairs Meeting. The Discussion of Core Topic Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) (44 U.S.C. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. Statements—Each group will 3501 et seq.) by January 14, 2002. The L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that present its final statements for reason for this emergency clearance public notice of these meeting be consideration by the entire group. request is that the American Gas announced in the Federal Register. 11:45–12 a.m. Workshop wrap-up and Association (AGA) plans to discontinue evaluation collecting and releasing weekly DATES: February 1–2, 2002. 12 noon Adjourn underground natural gas storage ADDRESSES: Sheraton Augusta Hotel, statistics at the end of April 2002. The 2651 Perimeter Parkway, Augusta, GA Public Participation Secretary of Energy announced on 30909. The meeting is open to the public. October 30, 2001, that EIA would begin FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Written statements may be filed with to survey weekly storage activities when Gerri Flemming, Science Technology & the Committee either before or after the AGA discontinues its data collection. Management Division, Department of meeting. Individuals who wish to make Storage estimates will be provided for Energy Savannah River Operations oral statements pertaining to agenda three multi-state regions comprising the Office, PO Box A, Aiken, SC 29802, items should contact Gerri Fleming at lower 48 States. These regions were (803) 725–5374. the address or telephone number listed chosen because they are familiar to both SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: above. Requests must be received five respondents and data users. Normal days prior to the meeting and reasonable clearance procedures would prevent the Purpose of the Board provision will be made to include the timely collection of this storage The purpose of the Board is to make presentation in the agenda. The information by EIA when AGA recommendations to DOE and its DeputyDesignated Federal Officer is discontinues its survey. regulators in the areas of environmental empowered to conduct the meeting in a DATES: Comments must be filed by restoration, waste management, and fashion that will facilitate the orderly January 4, 2002. related activities. conduct of business. Each individual ADDRESSES: Send comments to Bryon wishing to make public comment will Tentative Agenda Allen, OMB Desk Officer for DOE, be provided a maximum of five minutes Office of Information and Regulatory Friday, February 1 to present their comments at the end of Affairs, Office of Management and the meeting. 8–8:30 a.m. Opening remarks Budget. To ensure receipt of the 8:30–10 a.m. Presentation by DOE HQ Minutes comments by the due date, submission by FAX at 202–395–7285 or e-mail to Representative Minutes of this meeting will be 10–10:15 a.m. Morning break [email protected] is recommended. available for public review and copying The mailing address is 726 Jackson 10:15–11:30 a.m. Panel Discussion— at the Freedom of Information Public Participants will make a brief Place NW., Washington, DC 20503. The Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal OMB DOE Desk Officer may be presentation and address specific Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, issues on ground water across the telephoned at (202) 395–7318. (A copy SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 of your comments should also be DOE complex. a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday except 11:30–12 a.m. Site-Specific provided to EIA’s Statistics and Federal holidays. Minutes will also be Methods Group at the address below.) Information—Participants will view available by writing or calling Gerri FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: displays, obtain information and Flemming at the address or telephone Requests for additional information discuss site-specific issues. number listed above. 12–1 p.m. Lunch should be directed to Herbert Miller. 1–1:30 p.m. Site-Specific Information Issued at Washington, DC on December 11, Copies of the materials submitted to 1:30–1:45 p.m. Plenary Session— 2001. OMB may be obtained at http:// Participants will meet to finalize Rachel M. Samuel, www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oillgas/ core topic areas and receive Deputy Advisory Committee Management naturallgas/surveylforms/ assignments for breakout sessions. Officer. eia912package.pdf or by contacting 1:45–3:45 p.m. Core Topic Breakout [FR Doc. 01–31113 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Herbert Miller at (202) 287–1711. To Discussions—Groups will discuss BILLING CODE 6450–01–P ensure receipt of the comments by the
VerDate 11
due date, submission by FAX at 202– DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2. Sponsor: Federal Energy Regulatory 287–1705 or e-mail to Commission. Federal Energy Regulatory [email protected] is 3. Control No.: OMB No. 1902–0114. Commission recommended. The mailing address is The Commission is now requesting that Statistics and Methods Group (EI–70), [IC01–566–001 FERC Form 566] OMB approve a three-year extension of Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of the current expiration date, with no Energy, Washington, DC 20585–0670. Information Collection Submitted for changes to the existing collection. This Review and Request for Comments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a mandatory information collection requirement. section contains the following December 11, 2001. information about the energy AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 4. Necessity of Collection of information collection submitted to Commission, DOE. Information: Submission of the information is necessary to fulfill the OMB for review: (1) The collection ACTION: Notice of submission for review number and title; (2) the sponsor (i.e., by the Office of Management and requirements of Section 305 of the the Department of Energy component); Budget (OMB) and request for Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended (3) the current OMB docket number (if comments. by Title II, section 211 of the Public applicable); (4) the type of request (i.e, Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 new, revision, extension, or SUMMARY: The Federal Energy (PURPA). FPA section 305—Officials reinstatement); (5) response obligation Regulatory Commission (Commission) Dealing in Securities-Interlocking (i.e., mandatory, voluntary, or required has submitted the energy information Directorates defines the annual to obtain or retain benefits); (6) a collection listed in this notice to the reporting requirements for public utility description of the need for and Office of Management and Budget officers and directors to report office proposed use of the information; (7) a (OMB) for review under provisions of and director positions they hold with, among other entities, a public utility’s categorical description of the likely section 3507 of the Paperwork top twenty customers of electric energy. respondents; and (8) an estimate of the Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13). FPA section 305(c)(2) states ‘‘each total annual reporting burden (i.e., the Any interested person may file comments on the collection of public utility shall publish a list, estimated number of likely respondents information directly with OMB and pursuant to rules prescribed by the times the proposed frequency of should address a copy of those Commission * * * This statutory response per year times the average comments to the Commission as requirement to publish the customers’’ hours per response). explained below. The Commission list allows the public the opportunity to 1. Forms EIA–912, ‘‘Weekly received comments in response to an compare the customers listed with the Underground Natural Gas Storage earlier Federal Register notice of May 8, interlocking directorate information Report’’ 2001 (66 FR. 23240). The Commission filed in FERC Form 561 (1902–0099), by public utility officers and directors, for 2. Energy Information Administration has responded to these comments in its submission to OMB. identification of positions where the 3. OMB Number 1905–NEW DATES: Comments regarding this relationship may be employed, for 4. New (emergency clearance request) collection of information are best example to the detriment of the utility, or the public interest. The required 5. Mandatory assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this public utility filers, the necessary filing 6. The EIA–912 will collect data on notification. information, the requirement to publish natural gas inventories held in the information and the filing deadline underground storage facilities in the ADDRESSES: Address comments to Office are all specifically mandated by the United States. EIA will release weekly of Management and Budget, Office of FPA. The Commission is not summary information on the EIA web Information and Regulatory Affairs, empowered to amend or waive these Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory site along with analyses of the data. statutory requirements. Requirements Commission, Desk Officer, 725 17th Respondents will be a sample of 50 the Commission has the authority to Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. A natural gas underground storage amend, such as the filing format and the copy of the comments should also be operators. number of required copies are found at sent to Federal Energy Regulatory 18 CFR 46.3. 7. Businesses or other for-profit Commission, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attention: Mr. 5. Respondent Description: The 8. 2,600 hours (50 respondents x 52 respondent universe currently reports x 1 hour per response) Michael Miller, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. comprises on average approximately Statutory Authority: Section 3507(j)(1) of 175 public utilities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. Michael Miller may be reached by 6. Estimated Burden: 1,050 total L. No. 104–13). telephone at (202)208–1415, by fax at burden hours, 175 respondents, 1 (202) 273–0873, and by E-mail: response annually, 6 hours per response Issued in Washington, DC, December 13, (average). 2001. [email protected]. Jay H. Casselberry, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 7. Estimated Cost Burden to Respondents: 1,050 hours ÷ 2,080 hours Agency Clearance Officer, Statistics and Description per year × $117,041 per year = $ 59,083, Methods Group, Energy Information average cost per respondent = $338. Administration. The energy information collection [FR Doc. 01–31117 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] submitted to OMB for review contains: Statutory Authority: Sections 211 of BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 1. Collection of Information: FERC the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Form 566 ‘‘Annual Report of a Utility’s Act of 1978 (PURPA) (16 U.S.C. 825d as Twenty Largest Purchasers’’ amended and 16 U.S.C. 2601) and
VerDate 11
section 305 of the Federal Power Act (16 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY U.S.C. 825d). Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission Commission Acting Secretary. [Docket No. RP02–32–001] [FR Doc. 01–31064 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] [Docket No. EL02–40–000] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.; Cargill-Alliant, LLC Complainant, v. Notice of Compliance Filing Midwest Independent DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY TransmissionSystem Operator, Inc. December 11, 2001. Respondent; Notice of Complaint Take notice that on December 5, 2001, Federal Energy Regulatory Columbia Gas Transmission Commission December 11, 2001. Corporation(Columbia) tendered its filing in compliance with the November Take notice that on December 10, [Docket No. RP00–347–002] 30, 2001 order issued in this proceeding 2001, Cargill-Alliant, LLC (Cargill- accepting Columbia’s Eleventh Revised Alliant), filed a complaint requesting Canyon Creek Compression Co.; Sheet No. 44 to be effective December 1, fast track processing against Midwest Notice of Compliance Filing 2001, subject to refund and action in Independent Transmission System Columbia’s Docket No. RP01–262. December 11, 2001. Operator, Inc. (MISO). Cargill-Alliant Columbia states that copies of its requests the Commission to order MISO Take notice that on December 5, 2001, filing has been sent by first-class mail, to implement its open access Canyon Creek Compression Company postage prepaid, by Columbia to each of transmission tariff, and develop and (Canyon) tendered for filing to be part the parties on the official service list in implement its related business of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Docket No. RP01–262. practices, in a fair, consistent, and non- Volume No. 1, certain tariff sheets, to be Any person desiring to protest said discriminatory manner. filing should file a protest with the effective November 1, 2001. Any person desiring to be heard or to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Canyon states that the purpose of this protest this filing should file a motion 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC filing is to comply with the to intervene or protest with the Federal 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of Commission’s ‘‘Second Order on Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 the Commission’s Rules and Compliance with Order No. 637,’’ Regulations. All such protests must be First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, issued in the captioned docket on filed in accordance with § 154.210 of the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 November 23, 2001. Commission’s Regulations. Protests will of the Commission’s rules of practice Canyon states that copies of the filing be considered by the Commission in and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and determining the appropriate action to be are being mailed to each person 385.214). All such motions or protests designated on the official service list. taken, but will not serve to make must be filed on or before December 31, protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person desiring to protest said 2001. Protests will be considered by the Copies of this filing are on file with the filing should file a protest with the Commission in determining the Commission and are available for public Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, appropriate action to be taken, but will inspection. This filing may also be 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC not serve to make protestants parties to viewed on the web at http:// 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of the proceeding. Any person wishing to www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, the Commission’s rules and regulations. become a party must file a motion to select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the All such protests must be filed in intervene. Answers to the complaint instructions (call 202–208–2222 for accordance with § 154.210 of the shall also be due on or before December assistance). Comments, protests and Commission’s regulations. Protests will 31, 2001. Copies of this filing are on file interventions may be filed electronically be considered by the Commission in with the Commission and are available via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 determining the appropriate action to be for public inspection. This filing may CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the taken, but will not serve to make also be viewed on the Web at http:// instructions on the Commission’s web protestants parties to the proceedings. www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Copies of this filing are on file with the select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission and are available for public instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Acting Secretary. inspection. This filing may also be assistance). Comments, protests and [FR Doc. 01–31069 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] viewed on the web at http:// interventions may be filed electronically BILLING CODE 6717–01–P www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions (call 202–208–2222 for instructions on the Commission’s Web DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY assistance). Comments, protests and site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. interventions may be filed electronically Federal Energy Regulatory via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Acting Secretary. [Docket No. RP96–389–037] instructions on the Commission’s Web [FR Doc. 01–31063 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Columbia Gulf Transmission Co.; Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing Acting Secretary. December 11, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–31077 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Take notice that on December 5, 2001, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Columbia Gulf Transmission
VerDate 11
Company (Columbia Gulf) tendered for purchase, acquire or take unsecured to intervene or protest with the Federal filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, evidences of indebtedness of its affiliate Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Second Revised Volume No. 1, the Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, following tariff sheets, with an effective maturing not more than twelve months in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 date of December 1, 2001: after their date of issue up to an amount of the Commission’s Rules of Practice Second Revised Sheet No. 20 not in excess of $150 million at any one and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and First Revised Sheet No. 20A time outstanding. 385.214). All such motions and protests First Revised Sheet No. 20B Any person desiring to be heard or to should be filed on or before December Columbia Gulf states that it is filing protest such filing should file a motion 21, 2001 . Protests will be considered by the tariff sheets to comply with the to intervene or protest with the Federal the Commission to determine the Commission’s October 24, 2001 orders Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 appropriate action to be taken, but will approving negotiated rate agreements in First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, not serve to make protestants parties to Docket Nos. RP96–389–031, and –032. in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 the proceedings. Any person wishing to Columbia Gulf states further that it of the Commission’s rules of practice become a party must file a motion to has served copies of the filing on all and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and intervene. Copies of this filing are on parties identified on the official service 385.214). All such motions and protests file with the Commission and are list in Docket No. RP96–389. should be filed on or before December available for public inspection. This Any person desiring to be heard or to 21, 2001. Protests will be considered by filing may also be viewed on the web at protest said filing should file a motion the Commission to determine the http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ to intervene or a protest with the appropriate action to be taken, but will link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not serve to make protestants parties to instructions (call 202–208–2222 for 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC the proceedings. Any person wishing to assistance). Comments, protests and 20426, in accordance with sections become a party must file a motion to interventions may be filed electronically 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s intervene. Copies of this filing are on via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 rules and regulations. All such motions file with the Commission and are CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the or protests must be filed in accordance available for public inspection. This instructions on the Commission’s web with section 154.210 of the filing may also be viewed on the web at site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Commission’s regulations. Protests will http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ Linwood A. Watson, Jr., be considered by the Commission in link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Acting Secretary. instructions (call 202–208–2222 for determining the appropriate action to be [FR Doc. 01–31067 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] taken, but will not serve to make assistance). Comments, protests and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P protestants parties to the proceedings. interventions may be filed electronically Any person wishing to become a party via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 must file a motion to intervene. Copies CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of this filing are on file with the instructions on the Commission’s Web Commission and are available for public site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Federal Energy Regulatory inspection. This filing may also be Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission viewed on the web at http:// Acting Secretary. [Docket No. RP02–119–000] www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, [FR Doc. 01–31065 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff assistance). Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically December 11, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Take notice that on December 4, 2001, CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Dominion Transmission Inc. (DTI), instructions on the Commission’s web Commission tendered for filing as part of its FERC site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, [Docket No. ES02–15–000] the following revised tariff sheets, with Linwood A. Watson, Jr., an effective date of December 5, 2001: Acting Secretary. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.; Notice of Filing Second Revised Sheet No. 1076 [FR Doc. 01–31075 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] First Revised Sheet No. 1077 BILLING CODE 6717–01–P December 11, 2001. DTI states that the purpose of this Take notice that on November 30, filing is to eliminate the North of Valley DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2001, Consolidated Edison Company of Operational Flow Order. DTI requests a New York, Inc. (Con Edison of New waiver of the 30-day notice requirement Federal Energy Regulatory York) filed an application for an order, and an effective date of December 5, Commission pursuant to Section 204 of the Federal 2001. Power Act, authorizing Con Edison of DTI states that copies of its letter of [Docket No. ES02–13–000] New York during the period from the transmittal and enclosures have been Consolidated Edison Company of New date of the order through December 31, served upon DTI’s customers and York, Inc.; Notice of Filing 2003 to issue and sell unsecured interested state commissions. evidences of indebtedness maturing not Any person desiring to be heard or to December 11, 2001. more than twelve months after their protest said filing should file a motion Take notice that on November 30, date of issue up to an amount not in to intervene or a protest with the 2001, Consolidated Edison Company of excess of $1 billion at any one time Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, New York, Inc. filed an application for outstanding. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC an order, pursuant to Section 203 of the Any person desiring to be heard or to 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or Federal Power Act for authorization to protest such filing should file a motion § 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules
VerDate 11
and Regulations. All such motions or Secretary of the Commission for this Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, protests must be filed in accordance proceeding. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC with § 154.210 of the Commission’s Any person desiring to protest said 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of regulations. Protests will be considered filing should file a protest with the the Commission’s rules and regulations. by the Commission in determining the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, All such protests must be filed in appropriate action to be taken, but will 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC accordance with § 154.210 of the not serve to make protestants parties to 20426, in accordance with section Commission’s Regulations. Protests will the proceedings. Any person wishing to 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and be considered by the Commission in become a party must file a motion to regulations. All such protests must be determining the appropriate action to be intervene. Copies of this filing are on filed in accordance with section 154.210 taken, but will not serve to make file with the Commission and are of the Commission’s regulations. protestants parties to the proceedings. available for public inspection. This Protests will be considered by the Copies of this filing are on file with the filing may also be viewed on the web at Commission in determining the Commission and are available for public http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ appropriate action to be taken, but will inspection. This filing may also be link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the not serve to make protestants parties to viewed on the web at http:// instructions (call 202–208–2222 for the proceedings. Copies of this filing are www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, assistance). Comments, protests and on file with the Commission and are select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the interventions may be filed electronically available for public inspection. This instructions (call 202–208–2222 for via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 filing may also be viewed on the web at assistance). Comments, protests and CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ interventions may be filed electronically instructions on the Commission’s web link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. instructions (call 202–208–2222 for CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the assistance). Comments, protests and instructions on the Commission’s web Linwood A. Watson, Jr., interventions may be filed electronically site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Acting Secretary. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Linwood A. Watson, Jr., [FR Doc. 01–31082 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions on the Commission’s web Acting Secretary. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. [FR Doc. 01–31070 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary. Federal Energy Regulatory [FR Doc. 01–31074 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Federal Energy Regulatory [Docket No. RP96–383–036] Commission Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [Project No. 2064] Tariff Filing Federal Energy Regulatory Flambeau Hydro, LLC; Notice of December 11, 2001. Commission Authorization for Continued Project Take notice that on December 4, 2001, Operation Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) [Docket No. RP02–35–001] December 12, 2001. tendered for filing as part of its FERC Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of On November 26, 1999, Flambeau Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Compliance Filing Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. Hydro, LLC (on January 23, 2001, the 1406, with an effective date of December December 11, 2001. Commission approved the transfer of 15, 2001. Take notice that on December 4, 2001, the license from North Central Power DTI states that the filing is being made Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) Co., Inc. to Flambeau Hydro, LLC and to correct its November 27, 2001, filing tendered for filing as part of its FERC substituted Flambeau Hydro, LLC for in Docket No. RP96–383–035. Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, North Central Power Co., Inc. as the In addition, DTI withdrew Sixth the following tariff sheet to comply with relicense applicant), licensee for the Revised Sheet No. 1300, another tariff the Commission’s Letter Order issued Winter Project No. 2064, filed an sheet submitted on November 27, 2001. on November 28, 2001, in Docket Nos. application for a new or subsequent The November 27, 2001, filing RP02–35–000 and RP00–15–004: license pursuant to the Federal Power disclosed a negotiated rate agreement Act (FPA) and the Commission’s Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 1070 between DTI and Central Hudson regulations thereunder. Project No. 2064 Enterprises Corporation (Central DTI states that the purpose of this is located on the East Fork of the Hudson). DTI states that the purpose of filing is to comply with the condition Chippewa River in Sawyer County, the December 4, 2001, filing is to fix a imposed by the Letter Order. DTI Wisconsin. description in one of November 27 tariff requests an effective date of November The license for Project No. 2064 was sheets that incorrectly suggested that the 1, 2001, for its proposed tariff sheet. issued for a period ending November 30, negotiated rate agreement with Central DTI states that copies of its letter of 2001. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 Hudson constituted a material deviation transmittal and enclosures have been U.S.C. 808(a)(1), requires the from the form of service agreement that served upon DTI’s customers, interested Commission, at the expiration of a DTI has on file with the Commission. state commissions and on all persons on license term, to issue from year to year DTI states that copies of its letter of the official service list compiled by the an annual license to the then licensee transmittal and enclosures have been Secretary of the Commission for this under the terms and conditions of the served upon DTI’s customers, interested proceeding. prior license until a new license is state commissions and on all persons on Any person desiring to protest said issued, or the project is otherwise the official service list compiled by the filing should file a protest with the disposed of as provided in Section 15 or
VerDate 11
any other applicable section of the FPA. shown on the contract, Gulf South HIOS to enter into negotiated rate If the project’s prior license waived the requests an effective date of November agreements. applicability of Section 15 of the FPA, 1, 2001. HIIOS states that copies of its filing then, based on Section 9(b) of the Special Negotiated Rate Between Gulf South has been mailed to each of HIOS’ Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Pipeline Company, LP and Willmut Gas customers and the affected state 558(c), and as set forth at 18 CFR Company regulatory commissions. 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project Any person desiring to be heard or to Gulf South states that it has served has filed an application for a subsequent protest said filing should file a motion copies of this filing upon all parties on license, the licensee may continue to to intervene or a protest with the the official service list created by the operate the project in accordance with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary in this proceeding. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC the terms and conditions of the license Any person desiring to be heard or to 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or after the minor or minor part license protest said filing should file a motion § 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and expires, until the Commission acts on to intervene or a protest with the regulations. All such motions or protests its application. If the licensee of such a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, must be filed in accordance with project has not filed an application for 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC § 154.210 of the Commission’s a subsequent license, then it may be 20426, in accordance with sections regulations. Protests will be considered required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s by the Commission in determining the to continue project operations until the rules and regulations. All such motions appropriate action to be taken, but will Commission issues someone else a or protests must be filed in accordance not serve to make protestants parties to license for the project or otherwise with section 154.210 of the the proceedings. Any person wishing to orders disposition of the project. Commission’s regulations. Protests will If the project is subject to Section 15 become a party must file a motion to be considered by the Commission in of the FPA, notice is hereby given that intervene. Copies of this filing are on determining the appropriate action to be an annual license for Project No. 2064 file with the Commission and are taken, but will not serve to make is issued to Flambeau Hydro, LLC for a available for public inspection. This protestants parties to the proceedings. period effective December 1, 2001, filing may also be viewed on the web at Any person wishing to become a party through November 30, 2002, or until the http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ must file a motion to intervene. Copies issuance of a new license for the project link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the of this filing are on file with the or other disposition under the FPA, instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Commission and are available for public whichever comes first. If issuance of a assistance). Comments, protests and inspection. This filing may also be new license (or other disposition) does interventions may be filed electronically viewed on the web at http:// not take place on or before December 1, via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, 2002, notice is hereby given that, CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual instructions on the Commission’s Web instructions (call 202–208–2222 for license under Section 15(a)(1) of the site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. assistance). Comments, protests and FPA is renewed automatically without interventions may be filed electronically Linwood A. Watson, Jr., further order or notice by the via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Commission, unless the Commission Acting Secretary. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the orders otherwise. [FR Doc. 01–31081 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] instructions on the Commission’s web If the project is not subject to Section BILLING CODE 6717–01–P site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that Flambeau Hydro, LLC is authorized Linwood A. Watson, Jr., DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY to continue operation of the Winter Acting Secretary. Project No. 2064 until such time as the [FR Doc. 01–31073 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory Commision Commission acts on its application for BILLING CODE 6717–01–P subsequent license. [Docket No. ES02–16–000] Linwood A. Watson, Jr. Inland Power and Light Company; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Acting Secretary. Notice of Filing [FR Doc. 01–31122 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory December 11, 2001. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Commission Take notice that on November 28, [Docket No. RP02–118–000] 2001, Inland Power and Light Company DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (Inland) filed an application for High Island Offshore System, L.L.C.; authorization to issue securities Federal Energy Regulatory Notice of Tariff Filing pursuant to Section 204 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824c, and Commission December 11, 2001. part 34 of the Federal Energy Regulatory [Docket No. RP96–320–047] Take notice that on December 4, 2001, Commission’s (Commission) High Island Offshore System, L.L.C. Regulations, 18 CFR part 34. Inlands’ Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; (HIOS) tendered for filing as part of its filing is available for public inspection Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume at its offices in Spokane, Washington. No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with December 11, 2001. Any person desiring to be heard or to an effective date of January 4, 2002: Take notice that on November 28, protest such filing should file a motion 2001, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP Fourth Revised Sheet No. 2 to intervene or protest with the Federal (Gulf South) filed with the Commission Fifth Revised Sheet No. 171 Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 a contract between Gulf South and the Third Revised Sheet No. 172 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, following company for disclosure of a HIOS states that the tariff sheets are in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 recently negotiated rate transaction. As being filed to implement the ability for of the Commission’s rules of practice
VerDate 11
and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 11863, by MLWC. The Commission specified circumstances, to release all or 385.214). All such motions and protests issued a public notice that MHP’s a part of production from a lease that should be filed on or before December application for license for Project No. was previously dedicated to Nautilus. 21, 2001. Protests will be considered by 12020 had been accepted for filing on Nautilus states that a copy of this the Commission to determine the August 16, 2001. The above mentioned filing has been served upon its appropriate action to be taken, but will subsequent filings were filed with the customers. not serve to make protestants parties to Commission. Any person desiring to be heard or to the proceedings. Any person wishing to protest said filing should file a motion Commission Conclusions become a party must file a motion to to intervene or a protest with the intervene. Copies of this filing are on The Commission has previously Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, file with the Commission and are addressed the situation of when an 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC available for public inspection. This application for license may be filed in 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or filing may also be viewed on the web at competition with an initial permit § 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ application.1 The Commission has regulations. All such motions or protests link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the clearly specified that license must be filed in accordance with instructions (call 202–208–2222 for applications filed in competition with § 154.210 of the Commission’s assistance). Comments, protests and an initial permit application are to be regulations. Protests will be considered interventions may be filed electronically filed in response to the notice of the by the Commission in determining the via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 initial preliminary permit application, appropriate action to be taken, but will CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the not subsequent notices of a competing not serve to make protestants parties to instructions on the Commission’s web license application as claimed by the proceedings. Any person wishing to site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. MLWC. become a party must file a motion to Therefore, the Commission rejects the intervene. Copies of this filing are on Linwood A. Watson, Jr., pleadings of (1) MLWC’s filing for file with the Commission and are Acting Secretary. waiver of the requirements of § 4.36; available for public inspection. This [FR Doc. 01–31068 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] and (2) the three October 15, 2001 filing may also be viewed on the web at BILLING CODE 6717–01–P notices of intent to file competing http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ development applications filed by link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the MLWC, Fountainhead Properties LLC, instructions (call 202–208–2222 for DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY and City of Oglesby, Illinois, assistance). Comments, protests and respectively. interventions may be filed electronically Federal Energy Regulatory This notice constitutes final agency via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Commission action. Requests for rehearing by the CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the [Project No. 12020–000 Illinois] Commission may be filed within 30 instructions on the Commission’s web days of the date of this issuance of this site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Marseilles Hydro Power LLC; Notice of notice, pursuant to 18 CFR 385.713. Rejection of Notices of Intent To File Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Competing Applications and Waiver of Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary. Section 4.36 Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. 01–31080 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–31089 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P December 11, 2001. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Pursuant to the notice of acceptance of application for the Marseilles DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Hydroelectric Project, issued August 16, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 2001 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Commission following filings have been received: (1) [Docket No. RP01–267–002] Marseilles Land and Water Company [Docket No. RP02–117–000] (MLWC) September 18, 2001 filing for Northern Border Pipeline Co.; Notice of waiver of the requirements of § 4.36 of Nautilus Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Compliance Filing the Commission’s regulations Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC establishing deadlines for the filing of Gas Tariff December 11, 2001. applications with an initial preliminary Take notice that on November 28, permit application; and (2) the three December 11, 2001. 2001, Northern Border Pipeline October 15, 2001 notices of intent to file Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Company (Northern Border) tendered competing development applications Nautilus Pipeline Company, L.L.C. for filing to become part of its FERC Gas filed by MLWC, Fountainhead (Nautilus) tendered for filing as part of Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the Properties LLC, and City of Oglesby, its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume following tariff sheets effective April 1, Illinois, respectively. No. 1, the following tariff sheets to 2001: become effective on January 1, 2002: Second Revised Sheet No. 177 Background First Revised Sheet No. 24 Fourth Revised Sheet No. 250A On May 14, 2001, Marseilles Hydro First Revised Sheet No. 257 Fifth Revised Sheet No. 251 Power LLC (MHP) filed its application Fifth Revised Sheet No. 253 Nautilus states that the purpose of for license for the Marseilles Fourth Revised Sheet No. 266 this filing is to provide existing and new Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 12020, shippers an opportunity, under certain Northern Border states that the pursuant to the notice of intent it had purpose of this filing is to comply with filed in response to the Commission’s 1 Order No. 413, FERC Stats. & Regs. Preambles the Commission’s order dated notice of filing of an application for 1982–1985, section 30,632 (March 20, 1985); and November 8, 2001 in Docket No. RP01– preliminary permit, FERC Project No. Tropicana, 65 FERC section 61,904 (1993). 267–001 (97 FERC ¶ 61,162).
VerDate 11
Northern Border states that copies of First Revised Sheet No. 362 32 of the Public Utility Holding this filing have been served on all Northwest states that the purpose of Company Act of 1935, as amended. parties on the Commission’s service list this filing is to add a new rate schedule, Applicant is a California limited for this proceeding. Rate Schedule DEX–1, to Northwest’s liability company that owns and Any person desiring to protest said tariff for the deferred exchange of operates a gas-fired topping-cycle filing should file a protest with the storage gas. This proposed rate schedule cogeneration facility located in Oildale, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, provides a mechanism for Northwest to Kern County, California (Facility) that 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC increase the level of its system operates in simple-cycle mode. The 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of balancing gas in a particular gas storage Facility produces steam and utilizes a the Commission’s rules and regulations. facility without using mainline capacity high temperature fluid that is also All such protests must be filed in to transport the gas from a storage supplied to the steam host as a heat accordance with § 154.210 of the facility on another part of its system. transfer medium. The Facility generally Commission’s regulations. Protests will Any person desiring to be heard or to produces about 40.6MW (gross) and be considered by the Commission in protest said filing should file a motion 40.0 MW (net) of electricity and determining the appropriate action to be to intervene or a protest with the approximately 70,000 lbs/hr of high taken, but will not serve to make Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, pressure steam while producing 30,000 protestants parties to the proceedings. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC lbs/hr of low pressure steam, and Copies of this filing are on file with the 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or approximately 75 MMBtu/hr of thermal Commission and are available for public § 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and energy. The principal components of the inspection. This filing may also be regulations. All such motions or protests Facility are a steam injected GE LM6000 viewed on the web at http:// must be filed in accordance with gas turbine and a waste heat recovery www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, § 154.210 of the Commission’s steam generator capable of producing select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the regulations. Protests will be considered high and low pressure steam as well as instructions (call 202–208–2222 for by the Commission in determining the heating a high temperature fluid. The assistance). Comments, protests and appropriate action to be taken, but will Facility as currently configured includes interventions may be filed electronically not serve to make protestants parties to certain transmission interconnection via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 the proceedings. Any person wishing to CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the facilities necessary to effect the sale of become a party must file a motion to electric energy at wholesale and instructions on the Commission’s Web intervene. Copies of this filing are on site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. interconnect the Facility to the file with the Commission and are transmission grid. All of the electricity Linwood A. Watson, Jr., available for public inspection. This generated by the Facility is sold Acting Secretary. filing may also be viewed on the web at exclusively at wholesale. [FR Doc. 01–31078 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Any person desiring to be heard or to BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions (call 202–208–2222 for protest such filing should file a motion assistance). Comments, protests and to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, Federal Energy Regulatory CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the in accordance with rules 211 and 214 of Commission instructions on the Commission’s web the Commission’s rules of practice and site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and [Docket No. RP02–116–000] 385.214). All such motions and protests Linwood A. Watson, Jr., should be filed on or before January 2, Northwest Pipeline Corp.; Notice of Acting Secretary. 2002. Protests will be considered by the Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff [FR Doc. 01–31079 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Commission to determine the December 11, 2001. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P appropriate action to be taken, but will Take notice that on December 3, 2001, not serve to make protestants parties to Northwest Pipeline the proceedings. Any person wishing to DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Corporation(Northwest) tendered for become a party must file a motion to filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, intervene. Copies of this filing are on Federal Energy Regulatory file with the Commission and are Third Revised Volume No. 1, the Commission following tariff sheets, with an effective available for public inspection. This filing may also be viewed on the date of January 1, 2002: [Docket No. EG01–44–000] Commission’s web site at http:// Eighth Revised Sheet No. 6 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 14 Oildale Energy LLC; Notice of Fifth Revised Sheet No. 15 Application for Commission select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Second Revised Sheet No. 115 Determination of Exempt Wholesale instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Second Revised Sheet No. 116 Generator Status assistance). Comments, protests and Third Revised Sheet No. 117 interventions may be filed electronically Second Revised Sheet No. 118 December 12, 2001. via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 First Revised Sheet No. 119 Take notice that on December 6, 2001, CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Eighth Revised Sheet No. 200 Oildale Energy LLC (Applicant) filed instructions on the Commission’s web Third Revised Sheet No. 215 with the Federal Energy Regulatory site under the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. Eighth Revised Sheet No. 231 Commission (Commission) an Fifth Revised Sheet No. 245 Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Fourth Revised Sheet No. 303–A Application for Determination of Acting Secretary. Original Sheet No. 359 Exempt Wholesale Generator Status Third Revised Sheet No. 360 pursuant to part 365 of the [FR Doc. 01–31120 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Second Revised Sheet No. 361 Commission’s regulations and section BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY border where it currently interconnects with PG&E’s natural gas transmission Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory system. Commission Commission • GTrans is a newly created entity [Docket Nos. CP02–39–000, CP02–40–000, formed for the purpose of owning and [Docket No. ES02–14–000] CP02–41–000, and CP02–42–000] operating an interstate natural gas pipeline system that will result from the Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. Pacific Gas and Electric Company; integration of PG&E’s gas transmission Notice of Filing Standard Pacific Gas Line system with an interstate pipeline Incorporated; GTrans LLC; PG&E Gas segment to be acquired from GTN. December 11, 2001. Transmission, Northwest Corporation; The Applicants seek approval for PG&E’s reorganization into an interstate Take notice that on November 30, Notice of Applications pipeline as part of its plan to emerge 2001, Orange and Rockland Utilities, December 11, 2001. from bankruptcy. As such, the Inc. (O&R) filed an application for an Take notice that on November 30, Applicants indicate that their requests order, pursuant to section 204 of the 2001, Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Commission action and their Federal Power Act, authorizing O&R (PG&E), Standard Pacific Gas Line acceptance of the requested during the period from the date of the Incorporated (Stanpac), GTrans LLC authorizations are conditioned upon order through December 31, 2003 to (GTrans), and PG&E Gas Transmission, bankruptcy court approval. They further issue and sell unsecured evidences of Northwest Corporation (GTN), submit that formation of the new indebtedness maturing not more than (collectively referred to as Applicants), interstate pipeline system will, among twelve months after their date of issue filed in Docket Nos. CP02–39–000, other things: (i) create a new market up to an amount not in excess of $150 CP02–40–000, CP02–41–000, and CP02– center at Malin, Oregon, where GTN, million at any one time outstanding. 42–000, pursuant to sections 7(b) and Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Any person desiring to be heard or to (Tuscarora) and GTrans will parts 157 and 284 of the Federal Energy interconnect at a single point, (ii) protest such filing should file a motion Regulatory Commission’s (Commission) standardize the terms and conditions for to intervene or protest with the Federal regulations, for a series of authorizations transportation of natural gas in northern Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 that, taken together, will permit them to California with the interstate pipeline First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, extend PG&E’s existing intrastate grid, and (iii) facilitate future pipeline in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 natural gas transmission system to a expansions within and outside the State of the Commission’s rules of practice new market center located in the State of California. and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and of Oregon, near Malin, Oregon, thereby Applicants propose a limited 385.214). All such motions and protests integrating PG&E’s transmission and transition period during which GTrans should be filed on or before December storage systems into the interstate will offer service under rates, terms and 21, 2001. Protests will be considered by pipeline grid and bringing them under conditions that are virtually identical to the Commission to determine the FERC regulation, all as more fully set PG&E’s existing CPUC-approved rates, appropriate action to be taken, but will forth in the application, which is on file terms and conditions, including the not serve to make protestants parties to with the Commission and open to rates, terms and conditions for open- the proceedings. Any person wishing to public inspection. This filing may also access transportation and storage become a party must file a motion to be viewed on the web at http:// approved by the CPUC in the Gas intervene. Copies of this filing are on www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Accord settlement. Applicants propose file with the Commission and are select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the that the transition period end on the available for public inspection. This instructions (call 202–208–2222 for date that FERC accepts a section 4 filing filing may also be viewed on the web at assistance). to be made by GTrans no later than 14 months after GTrans accepts its http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ Applicants state that currently: • PG&E is an integrated utility requested certificate. In that section 4 link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the providing retail electric and natural gas filing, GTrans will propose to amend its instructions (call 202–208–2222 for service to millions of customers in open-access tariff to comply with all assistance). Comments, protests and California. As part of its utility Commission regulations and policies interventions may be filed electronically operations, PG&E owns and operates an applicable to open-access pipelines. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 extensive intrastate natural gas Subject to certain priority rights for CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the transmission system in northern service to the reorganized PG&E and instructions on the Commission’s Web California which is regulated by the certain existing customers of PG&E site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Public Utilities Commission of the State under pre-existing, CPUC-authorized Linwood A. Watson, Jr., of California (CPUC) pursuant to the long-term contracts, GTrans proposes to Hinshaw exemption to the Natural Gas hold an open season to award capacity Acting Secretary. Act. PG&E recently filed a voluntary to be taken under the rates, terms and [FR Doc. 01–31066 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] petition for bankruptcy on April 6. conditions in the section 4 filing. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P • Stanpac owns a Hinshaw pipeline Specifically, the Applicants request (the Stanpac Assets) in California which that the Commission take the following is operated by PG&E pursuant to a actions: March 28, 1996 Stanpac System • Issue a certificate of public Management and Operating Agreement convenience and necessity authorizing (Stanpac System Agreement). PG&E to acquire from GTN a segment of • GTN is an interstate pipeline existing pipeline approximately three extending from the U.S.-Canada border, miles in length beginning at the existing through the states of Idaho, Washington interconnection between GTN and and Oregon, to the California-Oregon PG&E’s transmission system, extending
VerDate 11
north across the California-Oregon on the Stanpac system under GTrans participate is by filing with the border and ending at the contracts and tariffs; Secretary of the Commission, as soon as interconnection between GTN and • Grant GTrans a limited waiver of possible, an original and two copies of Tuscarora near Malin, Oregon (the the ‘‘shipper-must-have-title’’ rule to comments in support of or in opposition Oregon Segment) and to integrate it with permit the reorganized PG&E, during the to this project. The Commission will PG&E’s existing gas transmission system transition period, to use GTrans consider these comments in (the result of this combination being the transportation capacity to transport determining the appropriate action to be GTrans Assets); customer-owned gas for the reorganized taken, but the filing of a comment alone • Issue a certificate of public PG&E’s noncore transportation will not serve to make the filer a party convenience and necessity authorizing customers; to the proceeding. The Commission’s • GTrans to acquire the GTrans Assets Rescind PG&E’s existing limited- rules require that persons filing from PG&E; jurisdiction certificate under § 284.224 comments in opposition to the project • of the Commission’s regulations; Issue a blanket certificate under • provide copies of their protests only to part 284, subpart G of the Commission’s Rescind the declarations of the party or parties directly involved in regulations authorizing GTrans to exemption under the Hinshaw the protest. operate the GTrans Assets and the Amendment granted to Stanpac in Comments, protests and interventions Stanpac Assets as an integrated Docket No. CP86–666–000 and to PG&E may be filed electronically via the interstate pipeline system and to in Docket No. G–2489; Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR • Pregrant the abandonment of provide open-access interstate 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions services under PG&E’s existing Gas transportation and storage services to on the Commission’s Web site under the Accord transportation and storage customers within and outside ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. contracts at the end of their contract California, including service to the If the Commission decides to set the terms and authorize GTrans to provide reorganized PG&E; application for a formal hearing before service under interim contracts for the • Issue a certificate of public an Administrative Law Judge, the remainder of the transition period, convenience and necessity under Part Commission will issue another notice while reserving the capacity underlying 157 of the Commission’s regulations describing that process. At the end of such interim contracts for award in the authorizing GTrans to assume and the Commission’s review process, a open season; and provide service under pre-existing, • Waive the requirement that final Commission order approving or CPUC-authorized long-term PG&E Applicants accept their certificates denying a certificate will be issued. transportation contracts with (i) Line within thirty days and grant such other Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 401 expansion shippers, (ii) expedited waivers and other and further relief as application docket (EAD) customers, Acting Secretary. may be proper and appropriate. [FR Doc. 01–31062 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] (iii) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) Any questions regarding this BILLING CODE 6717–01–P customers; (iv) Crockett Cogeneration; application may be directed to Donald and (v) the Sacramento Municipal K. Dankner, attorney for the Applicants, Utility District (SMUD); Winston & Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW., • DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Issue a blanket construction Washington, DC 20005, at (202) 371– certificate to GTrans under 18 CFR part 5700, fax (202) 371–5950, or E-mail: Federal Energy Regulatory 157, subpart F; [email protected]. Commission • Issue a certificate of public There are two ways to become convenience and necessity under part involved in the Commission’s review of [Project No. 1962–038] 157 of the Commission’s regulations this project. First, any person wishing to authorizing Stanpac to provide obtain legal status by becoming a party Pacific Gas & Electric Company; transportation service to Chevron and to the proceedings for this project Notice Rejecting Request for GTrans pursuant to the Stanpac System should, on or before January 29, 2002 Rehearing Agreement; file with the Federal Energy Regulatory • Adopt and approve the rates, terms Commission, 888 First Street, NE., December 12, 2001. and conditions set forth in GTrans’ Washington, DC 20426, a motion to By order issued October 24, 2001, the proposed FERC Gas Tariff and the intervene in accordance with the Commission issued an order approving individual rate schedules attached in requirements of the Commission’s rules the settlement agreement and the Exhibit P to the Application as initial of practice and procedure (18 CFR issuing a new license for Rock Creek- rates, terms and conditions for GTrans 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations Cresta Hydroelectric Project 1962, service under section 7 of the NGA and under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A located on the North Fork Feather River grant such waivers as are necessary to person obtaining party status will be Watershed in Plumas and Butte permit GTrans to offer service under placed on the service list maintained by Counties, California. 97 FERC ¶ 61,084. such rates, terms and conditions; the Secretary of the Commission and On November 27, 2001, the Baiocchi • Authorize GTN to abandon the will receive copies of all documents Family filed a request for rehearing of Oregon Segment by sale to PG&E; filed by the applicant and by all other that order. • Authorize PG&E to abandon the parties. A party must submit 14 copies Under section 313(a) of the Federal GTrans Assets by transfer to GTrans; of filings made with the Commission Power Act, 16 USC 825l(a), an aggrieved • Grant Stanpac a waiver of the filing and must mail a copy to the applicant party must file a request for rehearing and reporting obligations and the open- and to every other party in the within thirty days after the issuance of access requirements ordinarily imposed proceeding. Only parties to the the Commission’s order, in this case no on natural gas companies; proceeding can ask for court review of later than November 23, 2001. Because • Grant Stanpac a waiver of the Commission orders in the proceeding. the 30-day rehearing deadline is ‘‘shipper-must-have-title’’ rule to permit However, a person does not have to statutorily based, it cannot be extended, GTrans to use Stanpac capacity to intervene in order to have comments and the Baiocchi family’s request for transport gas owned by GTrans shippers considered. The second way to rehearing must be rejected as untimely.
VerDate 11
This notice constitutes final agency http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ instructions on the Commission’s web action. Requests for rehearing by the link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Commission of this rejection notice instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Linwood A. Watson, Jr., must be filed within 30 days of the date assistance). Comments, protests and Acting Secretary. of issuance of this notice, pursuant to 18 interventions may be filed electronically CFR 385.713. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 [FR Doc. 01–31072 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Linwood A. Watson, Jr., CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s Web Acting Secretary. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. [FR Doc. 01–31121 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Federal Energy Regulatory Acting Secretary. Commission [FR Doc. 01–31076 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BILLING CODE 6717–01–P [Docket No. RP95–136–017] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc.; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [Docket No. RP99–513–010] Notice of Refund Report Federal Energy Regulatory December 11, 2001. Questar Pipeline Co.; Notice of Commission Negotiated Rate Take notice that on December 5, 2001, Williams Gas Pipelines Central, Inc. December 11, 2001. [Docket No. RP96–312–065] (Williams) tendered for filing its Take notice that on December 3, 2001, interruptible excess refund report for Questar Pipeline Company’s (Questar) Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.; Notice of the twelve-month period ended filed a tariff filing to implement a Negotiated Rate September 2001. negotiated-rate contract as authorized by Williams states that it will mail December 11, 2001. Commission orders issued October 27, refunds inclusive of interest pursuant to 1999, and December 14, 1999, in Docket Take notice that on December 4, 2001, Section 154.501 of the Commission’s Nos. RP99–513, et al. The Commission Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company regulations, within 10 days following a approved Questar’s request to (Tennessee) tendered for filing a notice final Commission order accepting the implement a negotiated-rate option for of change in the rates for the October 18, refund report. Rate Schedules T–1, NNT, T–2, PKS, 2001 Negotiated Rate Agreement Williams states that a copy of its filing FSS and ISS shippers. Questar between Tennessee and NJR Energy was served on all participants listed on submitted its negotiated-rate filing in Services which was accepted by the the service list maintained by the accordance with the Commission’s Commission in Tennessee Gas Pipeline Commission in the docket referenced Policy Statement in Docket Nos. RM95– Company, 97 FERC ¶ 61,248 (2001). As above and on all of Williams’ 6–000 and RM96–7–000 (Policy agreed to in the November 30 Order, jurisdictional customers and interested Statement) issued January 31, 1996. Tennessee states that it is providing state commissions. Questar requested waiver of 18 CFR notice of substitution of a fixed price Any person desiring to protest said 154.207 so that Eleventh Revised Sheet effective December 1, 2001. filing should file a protest with the No. 7 to First Revised Volume No. 1 of Any person desiring to be heard or to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, its FERC Gas Tariff may become protest said filing should file a motion 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC effective December 1, 2001. to intervene or a protest with the 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of Questar states that a copy of this filing the Commission’s rules and regulations. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, has been served upon Questar’s All such protests must be filed on or 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC customers, the Public Service before December 18, 2001. Protests will 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or Commission of Utah and the Public be considered by the Commission in § 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and Service Commission of Wyoming. determining the appropriate action to be regulations. All such motions or protests Any person desiring to be heard or to taken, but will not serve to make protest said filing should file a motion must be filed in accordance with protestants parties to the proceedings. to intervene or a protest with the § 154.210 of the Commission’s Copies of this filing are on file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, regulations. Protests will be considered Commission and are available for public 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC by the Commission in determining the inspection. This filing may also be 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or appropriate action to be taken, but will viewed on the web at http:// § 385.211 of the Commission’s rules and not serve to make protestants parties to www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, regulations. All such motions or protests the proceedings. Any person wishing to select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the must be filed in accordance with become a party must file a motion to instructions (call 202–208–2222 for § 154.210 of the Commission’s intervene. Copies of this filing are on assistance). Comments, protests and regulations. Protests will be considered file with the Commission and are interventions may be filed electronically by the Commission in determining the available for public inspection. This via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 appropriate action to be taken, but will filing may also be viewed on the web at CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the not serve to make protestants parties to http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ instructions on the Commission’s web the proceedings. Any person wishing to link, select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. become a party must file a motion to instructions (call 202–208–2222 for intervene. Copies of this filing are on assistance). Comments, protests and Linwood A. Watson, Jr., file with the Commission and are interventions may be filed electronically Acting Secretary. available for public inspection. This via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 [FR Doc. 01–31071 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] filing may also be viewed on the web at CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY The Midwest ISO also seeks waiver of Comment date: January 29, 2002, in the Commission’s regulations, 18 CFR accordance with Standard Paragraph E Federal Energy Regulatory 385.2010 (2000) with respect to service at the end of this notice. Commission on all parties on the official service list 4. Entergy Louisiana, Inc., Entergy Gulf [Docket No. EG02–43–000, et al.] in this proceeding. The Midwest ISO has electronically served a copy of this States, Inc., Entergy Mississippi, Inc. UAE Mecklenburg Cogeneration LP, et filing, with attachments, upon all [Docket No. ER02–457–000] al.; Electric Rate and Corporate Midwest ISO Members, Member Take notice that on November 29, Regulation Filings representatives of Transmission Owners 2001, Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf of and Non-Transmission Owners, the Entergy Louisiana, Inc., Entergy Gulf December 11, 2001. Midwest ISO Advisory Committee States, Inc., and Entergy Mississippi, Take notice that the following filings participants, Policy Subcommittee Inc., tendered revised agreements in have been made with the Commission: participants, as well as all state compliance with the requirements of 1. UAE Mecklenburg Cogeneration LP commissions within the region. In Order No. 614. addition, the filing has been Comment date: December 20, 2001, in [Docket No. EG02–43–000] electronically posted on the Midwest accordance with Standard Paragraph E Take notice that on December 4, 2001, ISO’s website at www.midwestiso.org at the end of this notice. UAE Mecklenburg Cogeneration LP under the heading ‘‘FERC Filings’’ for (Mecklenburg) filed with the Federal other interested parties in this matter. 5. PacifiCorp Energy Regulatory Commission The Midwest ISO will provide hard [Docket No. ER02–458–000] (Commission) an application for copies to any interested parties upon Take notice that PacifiCorp on determination of exempt wholesale request. November 30, 2001, tendered for filing generator status pursuant to Part 365 of Comment date: December 27, 2001, in in accordance with 18 CFR part 35 of the Commission’s regulations. accordance with Standard Paragraph E the Commission’s rules and regulations, Mecklenburg is a Delaware limited at the end of this notice. Replacement Service Agreements for partnership and a wholly-owned Long-term Firm Transmission Service subsidiary of United American Energy 3. Pacific Gas and Electric Company with IDACORP Energy LP (IDACORP) Corp. Mecklenburg’s facility, currently a and ETrans LLC under PacifiCorp’s FERC Electric Tariff, Qualifying Facility under PURPA, is a [Docket No. ER02–455–000] Third Revised Volume No. 11 (Tariff). 132 MW topping-cycle cogeneration Take notice that on November 30, Copies of this filing were supplied to plant consisting of two coal-fired power 2001, ETrans LLC (ETrans) and Pacific the Washington Utilities and generation units. Gas and Electric Company as the Mecklenburg states that copies of the Transportation Commission and the reorganized debtor (Reorganized PG&E) Public Utility Commission of Oregon. application were served upon the (together Applicants) submitted for Securities and Exchange Commission Comment date: December 20, 2001, in filing the following unexecuted accordance with Standard Paragraph E and the Virginia State Corporation agreements: (i) A Back-to-back at the end of this notice. Commission. Agreement between ETrans and Comment date: January 2, 2002, in Reorganized PG&E, (ii) a Transmission 6. Duke Energy Corporation accordance with Standard Paragraph E Availability Agreement for Offsite [Docket No.ER02–459–000] at the end of this notice. The Power Supply between ETrans and Commission will limit its consideration Electric Generation, LLC (Gen.), (iii) an Take notice that on December 3, 2001, of comments to those that concern the Interconnection Agreement between Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) adequacy or accuracy of the application. ETrans Reorganized PG&E load serving tendered for filing a Service Agreement facilities, (iv) an Interconnection with Exelon Power Team for Firm 2. Midwest Independent Transmission Transmission Service under Duke’s System Operator, Inc. Agreement between ETrans and Gen providing for the interconnection Open Access Transmission Tariff. Duke [Docket Nos. ER01–123–005, ER01–786–001, between ETrans and Gen’s generation requests that the proposed Service ER01–966–003, ER99–3144–016 and EC99– facilities, (v) an Interconnection Agreement be permitted to become 80–016] Agreement between ETrans and effective on January 1, 2002. Duke states Take notice that on December 4, 2001, Reorganized PG&E retained generation that this filing is in accordance with the Midwest Independent Transmission facilities, and (vi) an Interconnection part 35 of the Commission’s regulations, System Operator, Inc. (the Midwest ISO) Agreement between Reorganized PG&E 18 CFR part 35, and that a copy has tendered for filing revised pages to its and Gen providing for the been served on the North Carolina Open Access Transmission Tariff interconnection between Reorganized Utilities Commission. (OATT), FERC Electric Tariff, Original PG&E distribution facilities and Gen’s Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Volume No. 1, which reflect that generation facilities (collectively, the accordance with Standard Paragraph E Schedule 13 (Super-Regional Rate Agreements). Applicants state that the at the end of this notice. Adjustment Charge) has been Agreements have been established as 7. Southern Company Services, Inc. suspended, effective December 5, 2001, part of the plan of reorganization filed until such time as the Alliance RTO by Pacific Gas and Electric Company [Docket No. ER02–460–000] implements its OATT and the benefits under Chapter 11 of the United States Take notice that on December 3, 2001, of the non-pancaked Super Regional bankruptcy Code. Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Rate methodology are available to ETrans and Reorganized PG&E state acting on behalf of Alabama Power Transmission Customers. The Midwest that they are serving a copy of their Company, Georgia Power Company, ISO submits that the suspension of its filing on each of the wholesale Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Schedule 13 effective date will result in customers that are currently a party of Power Company, and Savannah Electric the Midwest ISO charging customers for an existing contract with PG&E, as well and Power Company (collectively zonal rates that will only include the as on the California Public Utilities Southern Companies), filed Revision rates from Schedules 7, 8, and 9. Commission. No. 3 to the Agreement for Network
VerDate 11
Integration Transmission Service for unexecuted Service Agreement for NEP will cease its supply of this service Alabama Electric Cooperative, Inc. Network Integration Transmission under Service Agreement No. 23. under Southern Companies Open Service (NSA) and a Network Operating Narragansett will continue to take Access Transmission Tariff to Add Agreement (NOA) between ComEd and service under Service Agreement No. 23 Delivery Points. Revision No. 3 provides Central Illinois Light Company (CILCO). for other purposes. that transmission service under the These agreements govern ComEd’s Comment date: December 26, 2001, in referenced service agreement (Service provision of network service to serve accordance with Standard Paragraph E Agreement No. 225 under Southern retail load under the terms of ComEd’s at the end of this notice. Companies’ Open Access Transmission Open Access Transmission Tariff 14. American Transmission Company Tariff (FERC Electric Tariff Original (OATT). Copies of this filing were LLC Volume No. 5)) is to be provided at two served on CILCO. (2) new delivery points. Additionally, ComEd requests an effective date of [Docket No. ER02–467–000] Revision No. 3 specifies the Direct November 4, 2001, and accordingly Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Assignment Facility Charges for these seeks waiver of the Commission’s notice American Transmission Company additional delivery points. requirements. (ATCLLC) tendered for filing with the Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accordance with Standard Paragraph E accordance with Standard Paragraph E (Commission) an executed at the end of this notice. at the end of this notice. Interconnection Agreement between 8. Duke Energy Corporation 11. Duke Energy Corporation itself and Commonwealth Edison Company. The Interconnection [Docket No.ER02–461–000] [Docket No.ER02–464–000] Agreement describes the general terms Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Take notice that on December 3, 2001, and conditions of interconnected Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) operation between the parties. tendered for filing a Service Agreement tendered for filing a Service Agreement ATCLLC requests an effective date with Duke Power for Firm Transmission with Duke Power for Firm Transmission coincident with its filing and waiver of Service under Duke’s Open Access Service under Duke’s Open Access the Commission’s notice requirements Transmission Tariff. Duke requests that Transmission Tariff. Duke requests that in order to allow for economic the proposed Service Agreement be the proposed Service Agreement be transactions as they appear. Copies of permitted to become effective on permitted to become effective on the filing have been served on January 1, 2002. Duke states that this January 1, 2002. Duke states that this Commonwealth Edison Company, the filing is in accordance with part 35 of filing is in accordance with part 35 of Illinois Commerce Commission, the the Commission’s Regulations, 18 CFR the Commission’s regulations, 18 CFR Public Service Commission of part 35, and that a copy has been served part 35, and that a copy has been served Wisconsin and the Michigan Public on the North Carolina Utilities on the North Carolina Utilities Service Commission. Commission. Commission. Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Comment date: December 26, 2001, in accordance with Standard Paragraph E accordance with Standard Paragraph E accordance with Standard Paragraph E at the end of this notice. at the end of this notice. at the end of this notice. 15. Louisville Gas and Electric 9. American Electric Power Service 12. Elwood Marketing, LLC Company/Kentucky Utilities Company Corporation [Docket No. ER02–465–000] [Docket No. ER02–468–000] [Docket No. ER02–462–000] Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Elwood Marketing, LLC (Elwood) Louisville Gas and Electric Company American Electric Power Service tendered for filing with the Federal (LG&E)/Kentucky Utilities (KU) (AEPSC) tendered for filing pursuant to Energy Regulatory Commission (hereinafter Companies) tendered for § 35.15 of the Federal Energy Regulatory (Commission), a Notice of Cancellation filing an unexecuted unilateral Service Commission’s regulations, 18 CFR 35.15 of its Market-Based Rate Schedule, Rate Sales Agreement between Companies (2000), a Notice of Cancellation of Schedule FERC No. 1. Elwood requests and EnergyUSA–TPC Corp. under the Service Agreement No. 302 between an effective date of December 4, 2001. Companies’ Rate Schedule MBSS. AEPSC as agent for Indiana Michigan Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Comment date: December 26, 2001, in Power Company and Duke Energy accordance with Standard Paragraph E accordance with Standard Paragraph E DeSoto, LLC under American Electric at the end of this notice. at the end of this notice. Power Operating Companies’ Open 13. New England Power Company 16. Wisconsin Power & Light Company Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). AEPSC requests an effective date of [Docket No. ER02–466–000] [Docket No. ER02–469–000] February 2, 2002 for the cancellation. Take notice that on December 3, 2001, Take notice that on December 4, 2001, AEPSC serviced copies of the filing New England Power Company (NEP) Wisconsin Power & Light Company upon Duke Energy DeSoto, LLC c/o tendered for filing a Third Revised (WPL) tendered for filing with the Duke Energy North America, LLC. Service Agreement No. 23 between NEP Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Comment date: December 26, 2001, in and The Narragansett Electric Company (Commission) new rates to be charged accordance with Standard Paragraph E (Narragansett) under NEP’s FERC under its wholesale electric tariffs W– at the end of this notice. Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 1. 3A, PR–1, W–4A and DLM–1 to reflect 10. Commonwealth Edison Company Service Agreement No. 23 has been the current cost of service incurred by revised to reflect the fact that, WPL and its subsidiary South Beloit [Docket No. ER02–463–000] commencing on December 1, 2001, Water, Gas and Electric Company. Take notice that on December 3, 2001 Narragansett will procure all of its WPL has asked that the new rates Commonwealth Edison Company requirements for wholesale standard become effective on April 22, 2002. In (ComEd) submitted for filing an offer service from other suppliers, and addition WPL requests cancellation of
VerDate 11
its bundled wholesale electric tariffs W– Any person wishing to become a party For further information, contact 1, W–3 and W–4. must file a motion to intervene. Copies Kenneth Hogan at (202) 208–0434. A copy of the filing has been served of this filing are on file with the upon the Illinois Commerce Commission and are available for public Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission, the Public Service inspection. This filing may also be Acting Secretary. Commission of Wisconsin and the WPL viewed on the web at http:// [FR Doc. 01–31083 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] wholesale electric customers affected by www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P this filing. select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Comment date: December 27, 2001, in instructions (call 202–208–2222 for accordance with Standard Paragraph E assistance). Comments, protests and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY at the end of this notice. interventions may be filed electronically 17. Entergy Services, Inc. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Federal Energy Regulatory CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Commission [Docket No. ER02–470–000] instructions on the Commission’s web Take notice that on December 4, 2001, site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. [Project No.1864–005] Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf of Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Gulf Upper Peninsula Power Company; States, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, Inc., Acting Secretary. Notice of Availability of Draft Entergy Mississippi, Inc., and Entergy [FR Doc. 01–31058 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Environmental Impact Statement New Orleans, Inc., (collectively, the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Entergy Operating Companies) tendered December 11, 2001. for filing a Non-Firm Point-To-Point In accordance with the National Transmission Service Agreement and a DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Short-Term Firm Point-To-Point Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and Transmission Service Agreement both Federal Energy Regulatory the Federal Energy Regulatory between Entergy Services, Inc., as agent Commission Commission’s (FERC or Commission) for the Entergy Operating Companies, regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. and Shortleaf Energy Associates, LLC. [Project No. 2103–002 Washington] 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Comment date: December 27, 2001, in Projects staff has reviewed the accordance with Standard Paragraph E Cominco American Inc.; Notice of applications for new license for the at the end of this notice. Availability of Environmental Bond Falls Project, and has prepared a Assessment draft Environmental Impact Statement 18. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and (EIS) for the project. In the draft EIS, the Rockland Electric Company December 11, 2001. Commission’s staff has analyzed the [Docket No. ER02–471–000] In accordance with the National potential environmental impacts of the Take notice that on November 30, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and existing projects and has recommended 2001, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), the Federal Energy Regulatory that approval of the projects, with and Rockland Electric Company Commission’s (Commission) appropriate environmental protection (Rockland) submitted for filing a regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. measures, would be in the public proposed change to the PJM Open 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy interest. Access Transmission Tariff for the Projects has reviewed the application purpose of stating a charge by Rockland for subsequent license for the Cedar Copies of the draft EIS are available for Scheduling, System Control and Creek Project, located on Cedar Creek in for review in the Public Reference Dispatch Service under Schedule 1A of Stevens County, Washington, and has Branch, Room 2–A, of the Commission’s the PJM Tariff. prepared an Environmental Assessment offices at 888 First Street, NE, Copies of this filing were served upon (EA) for the project. 2.058 acres of Washington, DC 20426. all PJM members and each state electric federal lands, managed by the Any comments should be filed within utility regulatory commission in the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of 60 days from the date of this notice and PJM control area. Land Management, are affected by this should be addressed to Linwood A. Comment date: December 21, 2001, in project. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal accordance with Standard Paragraph E The EA contains the staff’s analysis of Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 at the end of this notice. the potential environmental impacts of First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20246. Standard Paragraph issuing a subsequent license for the Please affix ‘‘Bond Falls Project No. E. Any person desiring to be heard or project and concludes that the issuance 1864–005,’’ as appropriate, to all to protest such filing should file a of a subsequent license as proposed by comments. For further information, motion to intervene or protest with the Cominco American Inc. would not please contact Patrick Murphy at (202) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, constitute a major federal action that 219–2659. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC would significantly affect the quality of Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 20426, in accordance with rules 211 and the human environment. 214 of the Commission’s rules of The EA is attached to a Commission Acting Secretary. practice and procedure (18 CFR 385.211 order issued on December 7, 2001, for [FR Doc. 01–31086 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] and 385.214). All such motions or the above application. Copies of the EA BILLING CODE 6717–01–P protests should be filed on or before the can be obtained by calling the comment date. Protests will be Commission’s Public Reference Room at considered by the Commission in (202) 208–1371. Copies of the EA can determining the appropriate action to be also be obtained through the taken, but will not serve to make Commission’s homepage at http:// protestants parties to the proceeding. www.ferc.gov.
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY agencies; elected officials; Land Requirements for Construction environmental and public interest PG&E Transmission would construct a Federal Energy Regulatory groups; and local libraries and total of about 54 miles of new pipeline Commission newspapers. Additionally, with this loop, of which about 18 miles would be [Docket No. CP02–24–000] notice we are asking those Federal, in Idaho, 30 miles would be in state, local and tribal agencies with Washington, and 6 miles would be in PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest jurisdiction and/or special expertise Oregon. Construction of the loop would Corp.; Notice of Intent to Prepare an with respect to environmental issues to require about 860 acres of land. Of this Environmental Assessment for the cooperate with us in the preparation of total, about 849.4 acres would be Proposed 2003 Expansion Pipeline the EA. These agencies may choose to temporary right-of-way and about 10.5 Project and Request for Comments on participate once they have evaluated the acres would be maintained as new Environmental Issues proposal relative to their agencies’ permanent right-of-way. PG&E responsibilities. Agencies who would Transmission would also require the use December 11, 2001. like to request cooperating agency status of about 157.9 acres of extra workspace The staff of the Federal Energy should follow the instructions for filing for its ancillary areas, aboveground Regulatory Commission (FERC or comments described below. facility expansions, and access roads. Commission) will prepare an Summary of the Proposed Project PG&E Transmission’s existing environmental assessment (EA) that will permanent right-of-way for its mainline discuss the environmental impacts of PG&E Transmission proposes to system on private lands is 100 feet wide, the PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest expand the capacity of its existing containing the two parallel existing Corporation’s (PG&E Transmission) mainline system by constructing a total pipelines, Pipelines A and B. The 2003 Expansion Project in Oregon, of 53.6 miles of new natural gas pipeline proposed loop (Pipeline C) would Washington, and Idaho.1 These facilities loop 2 (42-inch-diameter) and to upgrade generally be constructed 30 feet east of would consist of about 54 miles of compression at its existing Compressor Pipeline B, using the existing 100-foot- pipeline and 19,500 horsepower (hp) of Station 14. PG&E Transmission requests wide permanent right-of-way as the compression. This EA will be used by Commission authorization, to construct, construction right-of-way. PG&E the Commission in its decision-making install, own, operate, and maintain the Transmission states that no new process to determine whether the following facilities: permanent right-of-way would be • project is in the public convenience and About 18.4 miles of 42-inch- acquired for construction of the necessity. diameter loop in Boundary County, proposed Pipeline C, except for some If you are a landowner on PG&E Idaho, including modifications to properties. After construction, the Transmission’s proposed route and Compressor Station 3 and Mainline existing 100-foot-wide permanent right- receive this notice, you may be Valve (MLV) 3–1 (Segment 3); • of-way would be retained, and would contacted by a pipeline company About 16.7 miles of 42-inch- typically result in a permanent right-of- representative about the acquisition of diameter loop in Spokane and Whitman way 90 feet west and 10 feet east of the an easement to construct, operate, and Counties, Washington, including Proposed Pipeline C. maintain the proposed facilities. The modifications to Compressor Station 6 In some site-specific locations, PG&E and MLV 6–1 (Segment 6); Transmission would install the new pipeline company would seek to • negotiate a mutually acceptable About 12.7 miles of 42-inch- loop 20 feet east of Pipeline B, instead agreement. However, if the project is diameter loop in Walla Walla County, of 30 feet. This decrease in separation approved by the Commission, that Washington, including modifications to between Pipeline C and B would occur approval conveys with it the right of Compressor Station 7 and MLV 7–1 in areas with residences or other (Segment 7); eminent domain. Therefore, if easement • structures in close proximity to the negotiations fail to produce an About 5.8 miles of 42-inch-diameter eastern permanent right-of-way agreement, the pipeline company could loop in Umatilla County, Oregon, boundary. By moving the proposed initiate condemnation proceedings in include modifications to MLV 8–1 and pipeline closer to Pipeline B, PG&E accordance with state law. MLV 8–2; Transmission would increase the • One new 19,500 horsepower (hp) A fact sheet prepared by the FERC distance between Pipeline C and the gas turbine-driven compressor to be entitled ‘‘An Interstate Natural Gas edge of the right-of-way. This alignment installed at PG&E Transmission’s Facility On My Land? What Do I Need would also be installed entirely within existing Compressor Station 14 in To Know?’’ was attached to the project PG&E Transmission’s 100-foot-wide Klamath County, Oregon; and notice Western Frontier provided to • permanent right-of-way. Associated pipeline facilities, On federal lands, PG&E Transmission landowners along and adjacent to the including four pig launchers, four pig proposed route. This fact sheet would obtain another Right-of-way receivers, and 5 mainline block valves. Grant from the U.S. Forest Service addresses a number of typically asked The general location of PG&E (USFS) for an additional overlapping questions, including the use of eminent Transmission’s proposed project 53.5 -foot easement and would install domain and how to participate in the facilities is shown on the map attached the new Pipeline C with a nominal 30- Commission’s proceedings. It is as appendix 1.3 available for viewing on the FERC foot separation from Pipeline B. For this project, the total width of permanent Internet web site (www.ferc.gov). 2 A loop is a segment of pipeline installed This notice is being sent to adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to right-of-way, including the existing and landowners of property crossed by and it at both ends. The loop allows more gas to be new easements, would be a maximum of adjacent to PG&E Transmission’s moved through the system. 110 feet in width. On federal lands, 3 The appendices referenced in this notice are not except for extra workspace for slopes proposed route; Federal, state, and local being printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available on the Commission’s website at the and at road, railroad, stream, and 1 PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest ‘‘RIMS’’ link or from the Commission’s Public Corporation’s application in Docket No. CP02–24– Reference and Files Maintenance Branch, 888 First RIMS refer to the last page of this notice. Copies of 000 was filed with the Commission under Section Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington DC 20426, or call the appendices were sent to all those receiving this 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act. (202) 208–1371. For instructions on connecting to notice in the mail.
VerDate 11
wetland crossings, no temporary right- —Potential geologic hazards, including By becoming a commentor, your of-way would be used as part of the seismic activity. concerns will be addressed in the EA construction right-of-way. • Water Resources and Wetlands and considered by the Commission. You should focus on the potential The EA Process —Potential effects on groundwater resources. environmental effects of the proposal, The National Environmental Policy —Effects on private water supply wells. alternatives to the proposal (including Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to —Effects on 20 perennial waterbodies, alternative routes), and measures to take into account the environmental including six crossings of the Moyie avoid or lessen environmental impact. impacts that could result from an action River. The more specific your comments, the whenever it considers the issuance of a —Effects on about 2.6 acres of wetlands. more useful they will be. Please Certificate of Public Convenience and carefully follow these instructions to • Biological Resources Necessity. NEPA also requires us 4 to ensure that your comments are received discover and address concerns the —Short- and long-term effects of right- in time and properly recorded: public may have about proposals. We of-way clearing and maintenance on • Send an original and two copies of call this ‘‘scoping’’. The main goal of the grasslands, wetlands, riparian areas, your letter to: Linwood A. Watson, scoping process is to focus the analysis and vegetation communities of special Acting Secretary, Federal Energy in the EA on the important concern. Regulatory Commission, 888 First environmental issues. By this Notice of —Effects on wildlife and species of Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC Intent, the Commission requests public concern, including raptors; 20426. comments on the scope of the issues it —Effects on fishery habitats, including • Label one copy of the comments for will address in the EA. All comments four federally listed fish species; the attention of the Environmental Gas received are considered during the —Potential effects on federally listed Branch I, PJ–11.1; preparation of the EA. State and local species, such as the gray wolf, grizzly • Reference Docket Nos. CP02–24– government representatives are bear, Sellkirk Mountains Woodland 000; encouraged to notify their constituents Caribou, Ute ladies’ tresses and • Mail your comments so that they of this proposed action and encourage habitats for the bald eagle, gray wolf will be received in Washington, DC on them to comment on their areas of and lynx in Idaho; and water howellia or before January 11, 2002. concern. and Ute ladie’ tresses in Washington. Federal and state agencies, such as the Our independent analysis of the —Potential impact on USFS sensitive U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Army issues will be published in the EA species. Corps of Engineers, are invited to which will be mailed to Federal, state, —Potential impact on state-listed participate as cooperating agencies in and local agencies, public interest sensitive species. the preparation of the EA. If any agency groups, affected landowners and other • Cultural Resources is interested in participating with the interested individuals, newspapers, —Effects on historic and prehistoric Commission on this basis, please write libraries, and the Commission’s official sites. to the Secretary with this request at the service list for this proceeding. A 30-day —Native American concerns. address listed above. Comments, protests and interventions comment period will be allotted for • Land Use review of and comment on the EA. We may be filed electronically via the —Effects on agricultural lands. will consider all comments on the EA Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR —Potential impacts on residential areas. and it will be used by the Commission 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions —Effects on recreation areas. in its decision-making process to on the Commission’s web site at http:/ —Effects of about 3.9 miles of crossing determine whether to approve the /www.ferc.gov under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link USFS, Panhandle National Forest project. and link to the User’s Guide. Before you lands (Segment 3). can file comments you will need to Currently Identified Environmental —Potential impacts on future land uses create an account which can be created Issues and consistency with local land use by clicking on ‘‘Login to File’’ and then The EA will discuss impacts that plans and zoning. ‘‘New User Account.’’ could occur as a result of the —Visual/aesthetic effects of Everyone who responds to this notice construction and operation of the constructing the project. or comments throughout the EA process proposed project. We have already • Air Quality and Noise will be retained on our mailing list. If identified a number of issues that we —Construction impacts on local air you do not want to send comments at think deserve attention based on a quality and noise environment. this time but still want to remain on our preliminary review of the proposed —Impact on local air quality and noise mailing list, please return the facilities and the environmental environment as a result of operation Information Request (appendix 3). If you information provided by PG&E of the upgraded compressor stations. do not return the Information Request, Transmission. These issues are listed • Pipeline Reliability and Safety you will be taken off the mailing list. below. This is a preliminary list of —Assessment of public safety factors Becoming an Intervenor issues and may be changed based on associated with natural gas pipelines. In addition to involvement in the EA your comments and our analysis. • • Geology and Soils Alternatives scoping process, you may want to —Mixing of topsoil and subsoil during —Assessment of alternative routes, become an official party to the construction. systems or energy sources to lessen or proceeding or become an ‘‘intervenor.’’ —Compaction of soil by heavy avoid impacts on the various resource Intervenors play a more formal role in equipment. areas. the process. Among other things, intervenors have the right to receive —Erosion control and right-of-way Public Participation restoration. copies of case-related Commission You can make a difference by documents and filings by other 4 ‘‘We’’, ‘‘us’’, ‘‘our’’ refer to the environmental providing us with your specific intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor staff of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP). comments or concerns about the project. must provide 14 copies of its filings to
VerDate 11
the Secretary of the Commission and e. Name of Project: Mottville a 14.5-foot-long, 28-foot-wide, and 25- must send a copy of its filings to all Hydroelectric Project. foot-long switchboard bay attached to other parties on the Commission’s f. Location: On the St. Joseph River, in the west end of the powerhouse; (6) a 50 service list for this proceeding. If you Mottville Township, St. Joseph County, horsepower, 460-volt, 3-phase air want to become an intervenor you must Michigan. The project does not affect bubbler system; (7) a 15-ton overhead file a motion to intervene according to Federal lands. traveling crane; (8) a 20-foot-wide rule 214 of the Commission’s rules of g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power stilling basin extending across the practice and procedure (18 CFR Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). length of the spillway; (9) a 12-inch 385.214) (see appendix 2).5 Only h. Applicant Contact: J.F. Norris, Jr., thick, reinforced concrete spillway intervenors have the right to seek American Electric Power Service apron; (10) an inoperable 4-foot-wide by rehearing of the Commission’s decision. Corporation, 1 Riverside Plaza, 150-foot-long concrete fishway with a Affected landowners and parties with Columbus, OH 43215, (614) 223–1700, slope of about 25 percent; (11) sets of environmental concerns may be granted or [email protected]. angled steel intake trashracks that are 3- intervenor status upon showing good i. FERC Contact: Lee Emery (202) feet 2-inches wide by 14-feet-high with cause by stating that they have a clear 219–2778 or [email protected]. 3/8-inch steel bars with 4-inch spacing and direct interest in this proceeding j. Deadline for filing additional study between the bars; (12) a five-mile-long, that would not be adequately requests: January 31, 2002. 378-acre reservoir with a gross storage All documents (original and eight represented by any other parties. You do capacity of 2,900-acre-feet at the normal copies) should be filed with: Linwood not need intervenor status to have your operating pool surface elevation of 770.4 A. Watson, Jr., Secretary, Federal Energy environmental comments considered. NGVD; (13) a three phase, 2.4/34.5 kV Regulatory Commission, 888 First transformer; and (14) other appurtenant Availability of Additional Information Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. facilities. The applicant estimates that Additional study requests may be filed Copies of this filing are on file with the total average annual generation electronically via the Internet in lieu of the Commission and are available for would be 7,800 MWh. All generated paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(iii) and public inspection. This filing may also power is sold to Indiana Michigan the instructions on the Commission’s be viewed on the web at http:// Power Company’s customers. www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the m. With this notice, we are initiating select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the ‘‘e-filing’’ link. consultation with the MICHIGAN The Commission’s Rules of Practice instructions (call 202–208–2222 for STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION require all interveners filing documents assistance). OFFICER (SHPO), as required by § 106, Similarly, the ‘‘CIPS’’ link on the with the Commission to serve a copy of National Historic Preservation Act, and FERC Internet website provides access that document on each person on the the regulations of the Advisory Council to the texts of formal documents issued official service list for the project. on Historic Preservation, 36, C.F.R., at by the Commission, such as orders, Further, if an intervener files comments 800.4. notices, and rulemakings. From the or documents with the Commission n. A copy of the application is on file FERC Internet website, click on the relating to the merits of an issue that with the Commission and is available ‘‘CIPS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket ι’’ from the may affect the responsibilities of a for public inspection. This filing may CIPS Menu, and follow the instructions. particular resource agency, they must also be viewed on the Web at http:// For assistance with access to CIPS, the also serve a copy of the document on www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link— CIPS helpline can be reached at (202) that resource agency. select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the 208–2474. k. This application is not ready for instructions (call 202–208–2222 for environmental analysis at this time. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., l. Description of Project: The existing assistance). A copy is also available for Acting Secretary. Mottville Project consists of: (1) Two 17- inspection and reproduction at the [FR Doc. 01–31061 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] foot high earth-filled embankments address in item h above. o. Pursuant to § 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR BILLING CODE 6717–01–P extending towards the center of the river of the Commission’s regulations, if any from both riverbanks, (i) a west resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person embankment that is 140 feet long and believes that an additional scientific DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY has a crest width of 15 feet and extends study should be conducted in order to to the powerhouse, (ii) an east Federal Energy Regulatory form an adequate factual basis for a embankment that is 365 feet long and Commission complete analysis of the application on has a crest width of 8 feet and extends its merit, the resource agency, Indian from the east riverbank to the spillway; Notice of Application Tendered for Tribe, or person must file a request for (2) a 237-foot long, reinforced concrete Filing With the Commission Soliciting a study with the Commission not later spillway with 10 steel Taintor gates Additional Study Requests and than the date set in paragraph j of this along the crest of the spillway, which Establishing Procedures for notice and serve a copy of the request are separated by 2.5-foot wide piers Relicensing and a Deadline for on the applicant. Submission of Final Amendments between Bays 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and p. Procedural schedule and final 1.5-foot-wide piers between the December 11, 2001. amendments: The application will be remaining Bays, (i) Taintor gates are 22 processed according to the following a. Type of Application: New Major feet wide and 13 feet high in Bays 1 and License. milestones, some of which may be 2 and 22 feet wide and 7.5 feet high in combined to expedite processing: b. Project No.: P–401–027. Bays 3 through 10; (3) a combined c. Date Filed: September 14, 2001. powerhouse-intake structure, made of Notice of application has been accepted for d. Applicant: Indiana Michigan Power brick and concrete, that is 118 feet long, filing Company. Notice of NEPA Scoping 28 feet wide, and 25 feet long; (4) 4 Notice of application is ready for vertical shaft, single runner, propeller 5 Interventions may also be filed electronically via environmental analysis the Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous type generating units with an installed Final amendments to the application must be discussion on filing comments electronically. generating capacity of 420 kW each; (5) filed with the Commission*
VerDate 11
Notice of the availability of the draft NEPA Please include the project number (P– later than 120 days after the specified document 12123–000) on any comments or comment date for the particular Notice of the availability of the final NEPA motions filed. The Commission’s Rules application. A competing license document of Practice and Procedure require all application must conform with 18 CFR Order issuing the Commission’s decision on the application interveners filing documents with the 4.30(b) and 4.36. Commission to serve a copy of that n. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent * Final amendments to the application document on each person in the official must specify the exact name, business must be filed with the Commission no service list for the project. Further, if an address, and telephone number of the later than 30 days from the issuance intervener files comments or documents prospective applicant, and must include date of the notice of ready for with the Commission relating to the an unequivocal statement of intent to environmental analysis. merits of an issue that may affect the submit, if such an application may be Linwood A. Watson, Jr., responsibilities of a particular resource filed, either a preliminary permit Acting Secretary. agency, they must also serve a copy of application or a development application (specify which type of [FR Doc. 01–31085 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] the document on that resource agency. j. Description of Project: The proposed application). A notice of intent must be BILLING CODE 6717–01–P project would use the existing Columbia served on the applicant(s) named in this River Jetty and include: (1) Two public notice. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY proposed concrete modules, each o. Proposed Scope of Studies under containing a wave energy capture Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Federal Energy Regulatory chamber and a 0.5 MW turbine- does not authorize construction. The Commission generator, with a total installed capacity term of the proposed preliminary permit of 1.0 MW, (2) a proposed 2.0-mile-long, would be 36 months. The work Notice of Application Accepted for 75 kv transmission line, and (3) proposed under the preliminary permit Filing and Soliciting Comments, appurtenant facilities. The project would include economic analysis, Protests, and Motions To Intervene would have an average annual preparation of preliminary engineering generation of 4 GWh. plans, and a study of environmental December 11, 2001. k. A copy of the application is impacts. Based on the results of these Take notice that the following available for inspection and studies, the Applicant would decide hydroelectric application has been filed reproduction at the Commission’s whether to proceed with the preparation with the Commission and is available Public Reference Room, located at 888 of a development application to for public inspection: First Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington, construct and operate the project. a. Type of Application: Preliminary DC 20426, or by calling (202) 208–1371. p. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Permit. This filing may also be viewed on the Intervene—Anyone may submit b. Project No.: 12123–000 . Commission’s Web site at http:// comments, a protest, or a motion to c. Date filed: September 17, 2001. intervene in accordance with the d. Applicant: Quantum Energy www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, requirements of rules of practice and Solutions. select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the e. Name and Location of Project: The instructions (202–208–222 for procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. Columbia River Jetty Project would be assistance). A copy is also available for In determining the appropriate action to located on the Columbia River in inspection and reproduction at the take, the Commission will consider all Clatsop County, Oregon, near the towns address in item g above. protests or other comments filed, but of Astoria, Oregon and Ilwaco, l. Preliminary Permit—Anyone only those who file a motion to Washington. The proposed project desiring to file a competing application intervene in accordance with the would be located on the Columbia River for preliminary permit for a proposed Commission’s Rules may become a Jetty which is federally-owned and project must submit the competing party to the proceeding. Any comments, maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of application itself, or a notice of intent to protests, or motions to intervene must Engineers. file such an application, to the be received on or before the specified f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). comment date for the particular application. g. Applicant contact: Mr. Tibor application (see 18 CFR 4.36). q. Filing and Service of Responsive Hegedus, 11917 37th Drive SE, Everett, Submission of a timely notice of intent Documents—Any filings must bear in WA 98028, (425) 337–3823, Fax (425) allows an interested person to file the all capital letters the title 357–9943. competing preliminary permit ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT h. FERC Contact: Tom Papsidero, application no later than 30 days after TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, (202) 219–2715. the specified comment date for the ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, i. Deadline for filing comments, particular application. A competing ‘‘PROTEST’’, or ‘‘MOTION TO protests, and motions to intervene: 60 preliminary permit application must INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the days from the issuance date of this conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. Project Number of the particular notice. m. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified application to which the filing refers. All documents (original and eight development applicant desiring to file a Any of the above-named documents copies) should be filed with: Linwood competing development application must be filed by providing the original A. Watson Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal must submit to the Commission, on or and the number of copies provided by Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 before a specified comment date for the the Commission’s regulations to: The First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. particular application, either a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Comments, protests and interventions competing development application or a Commission, 888 First Street, NE., may be filed electronically via the notice of intent to file such an Washington, DC 20426. An additional internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR application. Submission of a timely copy must be sent to Director, Division 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions notice of intent to file a development of Hydropower Administration and on the Commission’s Web site under the application allows an interested person Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory ‘‘e-filing’’ link. to file the competing application no Commission, at the above-mentioned
VerDate 11
address. A copy of any notice of intent, g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power inspection and reproduction at the competing application or motion to Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)–825(r) and Glacier address in item h above. intervene must also be served upon each Bay National Park Boundary n. Anyone may submit comments, a representative of the Applicant Adjustment Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105– protest, or a motion to intervene in specified in the particular application. 317, 112 Stat. 3002). accordance with the requirements of r. Agency Comments—Federal, state, h. Applicant Contact: Richard Levitt, rules of practice and procedure, 18 CFR and local agencies are invited to file Gustavus Electric Company, PO Box 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the comments on the described application. 102, Gustavus, Alaska 99826; (907) 697– appropriate action to take, the A copy of the application may be 2299. Commission will consider all protests or obtained by agencies directly from the i. FERC Contact: Bob Easton, Federal Applicant. If an agency does not file Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 other comments filed, but only those comments within the time specified for First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426; who file a motion to intervene in filing comments, it will be presumed to (202) 219–2782, e-mail: accordance with the Commission’s have no comments. One copy of an [email protected]. Rules may become a party to the agency’s comments must also be sent to j. Deadline for filing motions to proceeding. Any comments, protests, or the Applicant’s representatives. intervene and protests, comments, and motions to intervene must be received final terms and conditions, on or before the specified comment date Linwood A. Watson, Jr., recommendations, and prescriptions: 60 for the particular application. Acting Secretary. days from the issuance of this notice. The Commission directs, pursuant to [FR Doc. 01–31087 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] All documents (original and eight Section 4.34(b) of the Regulations (see BILLING CODE 6717–01–P copies) should be filed with: Linwood Order No. 533 issued May 8, 1991, 56 A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal FR 23108, May 20, 1991) that all Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY comments, recommendations, terms and First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. conditions and prescriptions concerning Federal Energy Regulatory The Commission’s rules of practice the application and APEA be filed with Commission require all intervenors filing documents the Commission within 60 days from with the Commission to serve a copy of the issuance date of this notice. All Notice of Application and Applicant- that document on each person on the reply comments must be filed with the Prepared EA Accepted for Filing, official service list for the project. Commission within 105 days from the Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Further, if an intervenor files comments date of this notice. Protests, and Soliciting Comments, or documents with the Commission and Final Terms and Conditions, relating to the merits of an issue that Anyone may obtain an extension of Recommendations, and Prescriptions may affect the responsibilities of a time for these deadlines from the particular resource agency, they must Commission only upon a showing of December 11, 2001. also serve a copy of the document on good cause or extraordinary Take notice that the following that resource agency. circumstances in accordance with 18 hydroelectric application and applicant- Motions to intervene, protests, CFR 385.2008. prepared environmental assessment has comments, terms and conditions, All filings must (1) bear in all capital been filed with the Commission and is recommendations, and prescriptions letters the title ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION available for public inspection. may be filed electronically via the TO INTERVENE’’, ‘‘COMMENTS,’’ a. Type of Application: Original Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR ‘‘REPLY COMMENTS,’’ Minor License. 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions ‘‘RECOMMENDATIONS,’’ ‘‘TERMS b. Project No.: 11659–002. on the Commission’s Web site (http:// AND CONDITIONS,’’ or c. Date filed: October 23, 2001. www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. ‘‘PRESCRIPTIONS;’’ (2) set forth in the d. Applicant: Gustavus Electric k. This application has been accepted heading the name of the applicant and Company (GEC). for filing. the project number of the application to e. Name of Project: Falls Creek l. The Falls Creek Hydroelectric which the filing responds; (3) furnish Hydroelectic Project . Project would consist of: (1) An the name, address, and telephone f. Location: On Falls Creek (also approximately 70-foot-long and 10-foot- number of the person protesting or known as the Kahtaheena River), in high dam; (2) a 0.5-acre reservoir having intervening; and (4) otherwise comply southeastern Alaska near the town of no storage capacity at elevation 665 feet with the requirements of 18 CFR Gustavus. The project would be located mean sea level; (3) a powerhouse 385.2001 through 385.2005. All on lands currently located within the containing one generating unit for a boundary of Glacier Bay National Park total installed capacity of 800 kilowatts; comments, recommendations, terms and and administered by the National Park (4) 5 miles of buried transmission line; conditions or prescriptions must set Service. The Glacier Bay National Park and (5) appurtenant facilities. The forth their evidentiary basis and Boundary Adjustment Act of 1998 (Act) project is estimated to generate an otherwise comply with the requirements provides that if a license is issued to average of 4.8 million kilowatthours of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain Gustavus Electric Company for the annually. The dam and project facilities copies of the application directly from project, the minimum amount of Glacier would be owned by the applicant. the applicant. A copy of any protest or Bay National Park land necessary to m. A copy of the application is on file motion to intervene must be served construct and operate the hydroelectric with the Commission and is available upon each representative of the project would be transferred, as part of for public inspection. This filing may applicant specified in the particular a land exchange, to the State of Alaska. also be viewed on the Web at http:// application. A copy of all other filings The Act also authorizes the submittal of www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link— in reference to this application must be a license application for this project to select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the accompanied by proof of service on all the Federal Energy Regulatory instructions (call 202–208–2222 for persons listed in the service list Commission. assistance). A copy is also available for prepared by the Commission in this
VerDate 11
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of: (1) A proposed powerhouse 4.34(b) and 385.2010. containing two wave generating units Federal Energy Regulatory having a total installed capacity of 1 Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Commission MW, (2) a proposed 2-mile-long, 75 kV Acting Secretary. Transmission line, and (3) appurtenant [FR Doc. 01–31088 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Notice of Application Accepted for facilities. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Filing and Soliciting Motions To The project would have an annual Intervene, Protests, and Comments generation of 4 GWh that would be sold to a local utility. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY December 12, 2001. Take notice that the following l. Copies of this filing are on file with Federal Energy Regulatory hydroelectric application has been filed the Commission and are available for Commission with the Commission and is available public inspection. This filing may be for public inspection: viewed on the Commission’s web site at Notice of Intent To File an Application a. Type of Application: Preliminary http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ for a New License Permit. link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the b. Project No.: 12124–000. instructions ((202) 208–2222 for December 12, 2001. c. Date filed: September 17, 2001. assistance). Comments, protests and a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to d. Applicant: Quantum Energy interventions may be filed electronically File An Application for a New License. Solutions. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 b. Project No.: 7321. e. Name of Project: Tillamook River CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the c. Date Filed: November 20, 2001. Jetty Project. instructions on the Commission’s web d. Submitted By: Erie Boulevard f. Location: On the Pacific Ocean and site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Hydro, L.P.—current licensee. Tillamook River, in Tillamook County, m. Preliminary Permit—Anyone e. Name of Project: Macomb Orgeon. The project would utilize the desiring to file a competing application Hydroelectric Project existing Tillamook River Jetty for preliminary permit for a proposed f. Location: On the Salmon River near administered by U.S. Army Corps of project must submit the competing the town of Malone, in Franklin County, Engineers. application itself, or a notice of intent to New York. The project does not occupy g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power file such an application, to the federal lands. Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). Commission on or before the specified g. Filed Pursuant to: Section 15 of the h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Tibor comment date for the particular Federal Power Act. Hegedus, Quantum Energy Solutions, application (see 18 CFR 4.36). h. Licensee Contact: Jerry L. Sabattis, 11917 37th Drive SE, Everett, WA Submission of a timely notice of intent Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P., 225 98208, (425) 337–3823. allows an interested person to file the Greenfield Parkway, Suite 201, i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell, (202) competing preliminary permit Liverpool, NY 13088 (315) 413–2787. 219–2806. application no later than 30 days after i. FERC Contact: Jarry Kosa, j. Deadline for filing motions to the specified comment date for the [email protected], (202) 219–2831. intervene, protests and comments: 60 particular application. A competing j. Effective date of current license: days from the issuance date of this preliminary permit application must December 1, 1956. notice. conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. k. Expiration date of current license: All documents (original and eight n. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified November 30, 2006. copies) should be filed with: Linwood development applicant desiring to file a l. Description of the Project: The A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal competing development application project consists of the following existing Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 must submit to the Commission, on or facilities: (1) A 77-foot-long, 32-foot- First Street, NE, Washington, DC. 20426. before a specified comment date for the high concrete dam; (2) two 38-foot-long, Comments, motions to intervene, and particular application, either a 25-foot-high intake structures; (3) two 6- protests may be electronically filed via competing development application or a foot-diameter, 60-foot-long steel gated the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR notice of intent to file such an waste tubes; (4) a reservoir (Lamica 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. Submission of a timely Lake) having a surface area of 14 acres on the Commission’s web site at http:/ notice of intent to file a development at a spillway crest elevation of 570.7 feet /www.ferc.gov/efi/doorbell.htm. Please application allows an interested person msl; (5) a 6.5-foot-diameter, 60-foot-long include the project number (P–12124– to file the competing application no pipeline; (6) a powerhouse containing a 000) on any comments or motions filed. later than 120 days after the specified generating unit having an installed The Commission’s Rules of Practice comment date for the particular capacity of 1,000 kW; (7) a tailrace; (8) and Procedure require all interveners application. A competing license a 370-foot-long, 34.5-kV transmission filing documents with the Commission application must conform with 18 CFR line; and (9) other appurtenances. to serve a copy of that document on 4.30(b) and 4.36. m. Each application for a new license each person in the official service list o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent and any competing license applications for the project. Further, if an intervener must specify the exact name, business must be filed with the Commission at files comments or documents with the address, and telephone number of the least 24 months prior to the expiration Commission relating to the merits of an prospective applicant, and must include of the existing license. All applications issue that may affect the responsibilities an unequivocal statement of intent to for license for this project must be filed of a particular resource agency, they submit, if such an application may be by November 30, 2004. must also serve a copy of the document filed, either a preliminary permit on that resource agency. application or a development Linwood A. Watson, Jr., k. Description of Project: The application (specify which type of Acting Secretary. proposed project utilizing the existing application). A notice of intent must be [FR Doc. 01–31123 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] U.S Army Corps of Engineer’s served on the applicant(s) named in this BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Tillamook River Jetty and would consist public notice.
VerDate 11
p. Proposed Scope of Studies under agency’s comments must also be sent to issue that may affect the responsibilities Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, the Applicant’s representatives. of a particular resource agency, they does not authorize construction. The must also serve a copy of the document Linwood A. Watson, Jr. term of the proposed preliminary permit on that resource agency. Acting Secretary. would be 36 months. The work k. Description of Project: The proposed under the preliminary permit [FR Doc. 01–31124 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] proposed project utilizing the existing would include economic analysis, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s Gray preparation of preliminary engineering Harbor, Washington Jetty and would consist of: (1) a proposed powerhouse plans, and a study of environmental DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY impacts. Based on the results of these containing two wave generating units studies, the Applicant would decide having a total installed capacity of 1 Federal Energy Regulatory MW, (2) a proposed 2-mile-long, 75 kV whether to proceed with the preparation Commission of a development application to Transmission line, and (3) appurtenant facilities. construct and operate the project. Notice of Application Accepted for The project would have an annual Filing and Soliciting Motions To q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to generation of 4 GWh that would be sold Intervene, Protests, and Comments Intervene—Anyone may submit to a local utility. comments, a protest, or a motion to December 12, 2001. l. Copies of this filing are on file with intervene in accordance with the Take notice that the following the Commission and are available for requirements of Rules of Practice and hydroelectric application has been filed public inspection. This filing may be Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. with the Commission and is available viewed on the Commission’s web site at In determining the appropriate action to for public inspection: http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ take, the Commission will consider all a. Type of Application: Preliminary link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the protests or other comments filed, but Permit. instructions ((202) 208–2222 for only those who file a motion to b. Project No.: 12125–000. assistance). Comments, protests and intervene in accordance with the c. Date filed: September 18, 2001. interventions may be filed electronically Commission’s Rules may become a d. Applicant: Quantum Energy via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 party to the proceeding. Any comments, Solutions. CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the protests, or motions to intervene must e. Name of Project: Grays Harbor instructions on the Commission’s web be received on or before the specified Project. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. m. Preliminary Permit—Anyone comment date for the particular f. Location: On the Pacific Ocean and desiring to file a competing application application. Grays Harbor, in Grays County, Washington. The project would utilize for preliminary permit for a proposed r. Filing and Service of Responsive the existing Gray Harbor, Washington project must submit the competing Documents—Any filings must bear in Jetty administered by U.S. Army Corps application itself, or a notice of intent to all capital letters the title of Engineers. file such an application, to the ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Commission on or before the specified TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Act, 16 USC 791(a)–825(r). comment date for the particular ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Tibor application (see 18 CFR 4.36). ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO Hegedus, Quantum Energy Solutions, Submission of a timely notice of intent INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the 11917 37th Drive SE, Everett, WA allows an interested person to file the Project Number of the particular 98208, (425) 337–3823. competing preliminary permit application to which the filing refers. i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell, (202) application no later than 30 days after Any of the above-named documents 219–2806. the specified comment date for the must be filed by providing the original j. Deadline for filing motions to particular application. A competing and the number of copies provided by intervene, protests and comments: 60 preliminary permit application must the Commission’s regulations to: The days from the issuance date of this conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory notice. n. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified Commission, 888 First Street, NE., All documents (original and eight development applicant desiring to file a Washington, DC 20426. An additional copies) should be filed with: Linwood competing development application copy must be sent to Director, Division A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal must submit to the Commission, on or of Hydropower Administration and Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 before a specified comment date for the Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. particular application, either a Commission, at the above-mentioned Comments, motions to intervene, and competing development application or a address. A copy of any notice of intent, protests may be electronically filed via notice of intent to file such an competing application or motion to the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR application. Submission of a timely intervene must also be served upon each 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions notice of intent to file a development representative of the Applicant on the Commission’s web site at http:/ application allows an interested person /www.ferc.gov/efi/doorbell.htm. Please specified in the particular application. to file the competing application no include the project number (P–12125– later than 120 days after the specified s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, 000) on any comments or motions filed. comment date for the particular and local agencies are invited to file The Commission’s Rules of Practice application. A competing license comments on the described application. and Procedure require all interveners application must conform with 18 CFR A copy of the application may be filing documents with the Commission 4.30(b) and 4.36. obtained by agencies directly from the to serve a copy of that document on o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent Applicant. If an agency does not file each person in the official service list must specify the exact name, business comments within the time specified for for the project. Further, if an intervener address, and telephone number of the filing comments, it will be presumed to files comments or documents with the prospective applicant, and must include have no comments. One copy of an Commission relating to the merits of an an unequivocal statement of intent to
VerDate 11
submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file to serve a copy of that document on filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for each person in the official service list application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to for the project. Further, if an intervener application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an files comments or documents with the application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to Commission relating to the merits of an served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. issue that may affect the responsibilities public notice. of a particular resource agency, they p. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr. must also serve a copy of the document Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Acting Secretary. on that resource agency. does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 01–31125 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] k. Description of Project: The term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P proposed project utilizing the existing would be 36 months. The work U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s Newport, proposed under the preliminary permit Oregon Jetty and would consist of: (1) A would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY proposed powerhouse containing two preparation of preliminary engineering wave generating units having a total plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory installed capacity of 1 MW, (2) a impacts. Based on the results of these Commission proposed 2-mile-long, 75 kV studies, the Applicant would decide Notice of Application Accepted for Transmission line, and (3) appurtenant whether to proceed with the preparation Filing and Soliciting Motions To facilities. The project would have an annual of a development application to Intervene, Protests, and Comments construct and operate the project. generation of 4 GWh that would be sold q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to December 12, 2001. to a local utility. Intervene—Anyone may submit Take notice that the following l. Copies of this filing are on file with comments, a protest, or a motion to hydroelectric application has been filed the Commission and are available for intervene in accordance with the with the Commission and is available public inspection. This filing may be requirements of Rules of Practice and for public inspection: viewed on the Commission’s web site at Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. a. Type of Application: Preliminary http://www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ In determining the appropriate action to Permit. link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the take, the Commission will consider all b. Project No.: 12126–000. instructions ((202)208–2222 for protests or other comments filed, but c. Date filed: September 18, 2001. assistance). Comments, protests and only those who file a motion to d. Applicant: Quantum Energy interventions may be filed electronically intervene in accordance with the Solutions. via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 Commission’s Rules may become a e. Name of Project: Newport, Oregon CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the party to the proceeding. Any comments, Jetty Project instructions on the Commission’s web protests, or motions to intervene must f. Location: On the Pacific Ocean and site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. be received on or before the specified Yaquina River, in Lincoln County, m. Preliminary Permit—Anyone comment date for the particular Oregon. The project would utilize the desiring to file a competing application application. existing Newport, Oregon Jetty for preliminary permit for a proposed r. Filing and Service of Responsive administered by U.S. Army Corps of project must submit the competing Documents—Any filings must bear in Engineers. application itself, or a notice of intent to all capital letters the title g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power file such an application, to the ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT Act, 16 USC 791(a)–825(r). Commission on or before the specified TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Tibor comment date for the particular ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, Hegedus, Quantum Energy Solutions, application (see 18 CFR 4.36). ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO 11917 37th Drive SE., Everett, WA Submission of a timely notice of intent INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the 98208, (425) 337–3823. allows an interested person to file the Project Number of the particular i. FERC Contact: Robert Bell, (202) competing preliminary permit application to which the filing refers. 219–2806. application no later than 30 days after Any of the above-named documents j. Deadline for filing motions to the specified comment date for the must be filed by providing the original intervene, protests and comments: 60 particular application. A competing and the number of copies provided by days from the issuance date of this preliminary permit application must the Commission’s regulations to: The notice. conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory All documents (original and eight n. Preliminary Permit—Any qualified Commission, 888 First Street, NE., copies) should be filed with: Linwood development applicant desiring to file a Washington, DC 20426. An additional A. Watson, Jr., Acting Secretary, Federal competing development application copy must be sent to Director, Division Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 must submit to the Commission, on or of Hydropower Administration and First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. before a specified comment date for the Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Comments, motions to intervene, and particular application, either a Commission, at the above-mentioned protests may be electronically filed via competing development application or a address. A copy of any notice of intent, the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR notice of intent to file such an competing application or motion to 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions application. Submission of a timely intervene must also be served upon each on the Commission’s web site at notice of intent to file a development representative of the Applicant http://www.ferc.gov/efi/doorbell.htm. application allows an interested person specified in the particular application. Please include the project number (P– to file the competing application no s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, 12126–000) on any comments or later than 120 days after the specified and local agencies are invited to file motions filed. comment date for the particular comments on the described application. The Commission’s Rules of Practice application. A competing license A copy of the application may be and Procedure require all interveners application must conform with 18 CFR obtained by agencies directly from the filing documents with the Commission 4.30(b) and 4.36.
VerDate 11
o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent s. Agency Comments—Federal, state, Carol Connors at 202–208–0870 or must specify the exact name, business and local agencies are invited to file [email protected]. address, and telephone number of the comments on the described application. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., prospective applicant, and must include A copy of the application may be an unequivocal statement of intent to obtained by agencies directly from the Acting Secretary. submit, if such an application may be Applicant. If an agency does not file [FR Doc. 01–31060 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] filed, either a preliminary permit comments within the time specified for BILLING CODE 6717–01–P application or a development filing comments, it will be presumed to application (specify which type of have no comments. One copy of an DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY application). A notice of intent must be agency’s comments must also be sent to served on the applicant(s) named in this the Applicant’s representatives. Federal Energy Regulatory public notice. Commission p. Proposed Scope of Studies under Linwood A. Watson, Jr. Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, Acting Secretary. [Project No. 2634] does not authorize construction. The [FR Doc. 01–31126 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] term of the proposed preliminary permit BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Great Northern Paper, Inc.; Notice of would be 36 months. The work Final Restricted Service List for proposed under the preliminary permit Comments on a Programmatic would include economic analysis, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agreement for Managing Properties preparation of preliminary engineering Included in or Eligible for Inclusion in plans, and a study of environmental Federal Energy Regulatory the National Register of Historic Places Commission impacts. Based on the results of these December 11, 2001. studies, the Applicant would decide [Docket No. AD02–6–000] On September 24, 2001, the Federal whether to proceed with the preparation Energy Regulatory Commission of a development application to Conference on Energy Infrastructure; (Commission) issued a notice for the construct and operate the project. Notice of Conference Storage Project (FERC No. 2634–007) q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to December 11, 2001. proposing to establish a restricted Intervene—Anyone may submit service list for the purpose of comments, a protest, or a motion to The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will hold a developing and executing a intervene in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement (PA) for requirements of Rules of Practice and conference on energy infrastructure issues in the northeastern states on managing properties included in or Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. eligible for inclusion in the National In determining the appropriate action to Thursday, January 31, 2002 at the Helmsley Park Lane Hotel, 36 Central Register of Historic Places. On take, the Commission will consider all November 21, 2001, the Commission protests or other comments filed, but Park South, New York City, New York. issued a notice modifying the restricted only those who file a motion to The conference will discuss the service list for the purpose of revising intervene in accordance with the adequacy of the electric, gas and the participates. The Storage project is Commission’s Rules may become a hydropower infrastructure in the located in Piscataquis and Somerset party to the proceeding. Any comments, Northeast, and related matters. The Counties in Maine. Great Northern protests, or motions to intervene must Governors of the northeastern states have been invited to participate. The Paper, Inc. is the licensee. be received on or before the specified Rule 2010 of the Commission’s Rules comment date for the particular goal is to identify present infrastructure needs, investment and other barriers to of Practice and Procedure provides that, application. to eliminate unnecessary expense or r. Filing and Service of Responsive expansion, and environmental and improve administrative efficiency, the Documents—Any filings must bear in landowner concerns. We look forward Secretary may establish a restricted all capital letters the title to an informative discussion of the issues to clarify how we can facilitate service list for a particular phase or ‘‘COMMENTS’’, ‘‘NOTICE OF INTENT 1 TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION’’, and enhance a comprehensive issue in a proceeding. The restricted ‘‘COMPETING APPLICATION’’, collaborative approach to energy service list should contain the names of ‘‘PROTEST’’, ‘‘MOTION TO infrastructure development and persons on the service list who, in the INTERVENE’’, as applicable, and the reliability for the northeastern states. It judgment of the decisional authority Project Number of the particular is our firm belief that an adequate, well- establishing the list, are active application to which the filing refers. functioning energy infrastructure is a participants with respect to the phase or Any of the above-named documents keystone of workable, competitive issue in the proceeding for which the must be filed by providing the original energy markets. list is established. The following change and the number of copies provided by The one-day meeting will begin at 9 to the existing restricted service list is the Commission’s regulations to: The a.m. and conclude at 4 p.m. All noted. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory interested parties are invited to attend. Add ‘‘Donald Soctomah, Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Hotel rooms have been blocked at the Passamaquoddy Tribe, PO Box 301, Washington, D.C. 20426. An additional Helmsley Park Lane under the name of Princeton, Maine 04668’’. copy must be sent to Director, Division the Federal Energy Regulatory As a result of these changes, the final of Hydropower Administration and Commission for any attending guests to restricted service list for purposes of Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory reserve a one- or two-night stay but will commenting on the PA, for Project No. Commission, at the above-mentioned be released by January 9, 2002 (212– P–2634 is as follows: address. A copy of any notice of intent, 371–4000). Dr. Laura Henley Dean,Advisory competing application or motion to We will issue further details on the Council on Historic intervene must also be served upon each conference, including the agenda and a Preservation,The Old Post Office representative of the Applicant list of participants, as plans evolve. For specified in the particular application. additional information, please contact 118 CFR 385.2010.
VerDate 11
Building, Suite 803,1100 EPA Office of Environmental Justice, Microsoft’’ Excel 97 (hereafter, Excel) in Pennsylvania Avenue, (202) 564–0152. the manner of linked ‘‘workbooks.’’ NW.,Washington, DC 20004. Certain calculations and manipulations Correction Earle G. Shettleworth, Jr.,State Historic of data performed in Excel may be lost Preservation Officer,Maine Historic In the Federal Register of November if the database is converted to another Preservation Commission, 55 5, 2001, in FR Doc. 01–27591, beginning software; therefore, any recalculations Capitol Street, 65 State House on page 55986, make the following for the data in the database should be Station, Augusta, Maine 04333. corrections: performed using Excel. The Excel Brian R. Stetson, Manager of The date ‘‘February 21, 2002’’ is corrected workbooks should be compatible with Environmental Affairs, Great to read ‘‘February 22, 2002 in the following the Macintosh’’ version of Excel. Northern Paper, Inc., Engineering places: page 55986, in the first column, in the Because the database and Users Manual second paragraph identified as DATES; page and Research Building, 1 Katahdin are stored on a CD–ROM, a CD player 55988, second column, in the last paragraph, is required for use. Ave.,Millinocket, Maine 04462– in the second sentence and third column, in 1373. the first line; and page 55989, second ADDRESSES: The database is available Gregory W. Sample, Drummond column, third paragraph. electronically through the National Woodsum & MacMahon, 245 Center for Environmental Assessment Dated: December 12, 2001. website at the following URL: http:// Commercial Street, PO Box 9781, Sheila Lewis, Portland, Maine 04104–5081. www.epa.gov/ncea. Copies of the Small Grants Program Manager. database are also available without cost Land and Water Associates, 9 Union [FR Doc. 01–31177 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] from EPA’s National Service Center for Street,Hallowell, Maine 04347. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Environmental Publications (NSCEP) in M. Kirstin Rohrer, Office of the Cincinnati, Ohio (telephone: 1–800– Solicitor, MS–6456, 1849 C St., 490–9198, or 513–489–8190; facsimile NW., Washington, DC 20240. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 513–489–8695). When requesting a copy Judith M. Stolfo, Office of the Regional AGENCY of the CD–ROM, please provide your Solicitor, One Gateway Center, [FRL–7119–4] name, mailing address, and the Suite 612, Newton, Massachusetts document number (EPA/600/C–01/012). 02458–02802. Database of Sources of Environmental No paper copies will be made available. Barry Dana, Chief, Penobscot Indian Releases of Dioxin-Like Compounds in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nation, River Road; Indian Island, the United States: Reference Years David Cleverly, National Center for Old Town, Maine 04468. 1987 and 1995 Environmental Assessment-Washington Franklin Keel, Bureau of Indian Affairs, AGENCY: Environmental Protection Office (8623D), U.S. Environmental Eastern Regional Office, 711 Stewarts Agency (EPA). Protection Agency, Washington DC Ferry Pike, Nashville, Tennessee 20460 by email ([email protected]) ACTION: Notice of availability of a final or telephone(202–564–3238). 37214. product. Donald Soctomah, Passamaquoddy SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CDD/CDF Tribe, PO Box 301, Princeton, Maine SUMMARY: The National Center for emissions data were extracted from 04668. Environmental Assessment within the original engineering test reports of the Kevin R. Mendik, National Park Service, Office of Research and Development, U. results of sampling the stacks, Northeast Field Area, 15 State Street, S. Environmental Protection Agency, wastewater discharges, and other Boston, Massachusetts 02109. announces the availability of the final emission streams at specific facilities Database of Sources of Environmental and sources. The database was designed Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Releases of Dioxin-Like Compounds in to accommodate facility-based Acting Secretary. the United States: Reference Years 1987 emissions, mobile source emissions, and [FR Doc. 01–31084 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] and 1995 (EPA/600/C–01/012, March area source emissions. Test reports from BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 2001) and Users Manual (EPA/600/R– various state agencies, trade 01/012, March 2001). The database is an associations, EPA program offices, and electronic repository of congener- EPA regulatory dockets were ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION specific chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin consolidated and assimilated into the AGENCY and chlorinated dibenzofuran (CDD/ database. Most of the emissions data in CDF) emissions and environmental Version 3.0 of the database concern [FRL–7119–3] release data from all known sources in releases to the air because few data are Office of Environmental Justice Small the United States. The database contains currently available on releases to other Grants Program—Application information that can be analyzed to media. Guidance FY 2002 track emissions and releases of CDD/ EPA intends to periodically update CDF over time, compare congener- the Database of Sources of AGENCY: Environmental Protection specific profiles between and among Environmental Releases of Dioxin-Like Agency (EPA). source categories, and develop source- Compounds in the United States: ACTION: Notice; correction. specific emission factors that can then Reference Years 1987 and 1995 to reflect be used to estimate emissions. The changes in emissions of dioxin-like SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection information contained in the current compounds that may be associated with Agency published a document in the version of the database is associated regulatory activity, advances in Federal Register of November 5, 2001, with two reference years: 1995 and pollution control, abatement, and concerning application guidance for 1987. source-specific technologies. The next environmental justice small grants. The The structure of the database and the update to the database is scheduled for document contained incorrect dates. flow of information into and out of the the fall of 2002, and will represent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: database are described in the Users emissions of dioxin-like compounds in Sheila Lewis, Senior Program Analyst, Manual. The database was created using the United States for reference year
VerDate 11
2000. Please consult the database DATES: Comments must be submitted on fluids and hydrostatic test water form website (above) for status and or before January 17, 2002. pressure testing of existing pipelines. availability of this update. ADDRESSES: Comments should be A copy of the Region’s responses to Dated: December 5, 2001. addressed to Michelle Lauterback, comments and the final permit may be obtained from the EPA Region 6 internet George W. Alapas, Enforcement Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, site: http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6wq/ Acting Director, National Center for 6wq.htm. Environmental Assessment. Regional I, One Congress Street, Suite [FR Doc. 01–31175 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 1100, Mail code SES, Boston, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Massachusetts 02203, and should refer Diane Smith, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross BILLING CODE 6560–50–P to: In re: Gardner and Hubbardston Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202, Superfund Site, U.S. EPA Docket No. Telephone: (214) 665 7191, or via ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CERCLA–01–2001–0076. EMAIL to the following address: AGENCY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A [email protected]. copy of the proposed Agreement and [FRL–7118–9] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Covenant Not to Sue can be obtained Entities. Entities potentially regulated Proposed Agreement and Covenant from Sharon Fennelly, Enforcement by this action are those which operate Not To Sue Pursuant to the Coordinator, U.S. Environmental offshore oil and gas extraction facilities Comprehensive Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, One located in the Outer Continental Shelf Response, Compensation, and Liability Congress Street, Mailcode HBR, Boston, Offshore of Louisiana and Texas. Act of 1980, as Amended by the Massachusetts 02214, (617) 918–1263. Dated: November 7, 2001. Examples of regulated enti- Superfund Amendments and Category ties Reauthorization Act of 1986; In Re: Robert V. Varney, Gardner and Hubbardston Superfund Regional Administrator, Region I. Industry ...... Offshore Oil and Gas Extrac- Site, Gardner, Massachusetts [FR Doc. 01–31180 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] tion Platforms. BILLING CODE 6560–50–M AGENCY: Environmental Protection This table lists the types of entities Agency. that EPA is now aware could potentially ACTION: Notice of proposed agreement; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION be regulated by this action. Other types request for public comment. AGENCY of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether SUMMARY: In accordance with the [FRL–7119–5] your (facility, company, business, Comprehensive Environmental organization, etc.) is regulated by this Response Compensation, and Liability Notice of Final NPDES General Permit; Final NPDES General Permit for New action, you should carefully examine Act, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. the applicability criteria in Part I. 9601, et seq., notice is hereby given of and Existing Sources and New Dischargers in the Offshore Section A.1. of the general permit. If you a proposed Agreement and Covenant have questions regarding the Not to Sue between the United States, Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Category for the Western applicability of this action to a on behalf of the U.S. Environmental particular entity, consult the person Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) and The Portion of the Outer Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Mexico (GMG290000) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER Gardner Little League, Inc. INFORMATION CONTACT section. (‘‘Purchaser’’). The Purchaser plans to AGENCY: Environmental Protection Pursuant to section 402 of the Clean acquire approximately 10 acres of Agency (EPA). Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1342, EPA property that is currently owned by Mr. ACTION: Notice. proposed and solicited comments on Ronald Kirwood. The Purchaser intends NPDES general permit GMG290000 at to use the property to construct a youth SUMMARY: EPA Region 6 today issues a 63 FR 2238 (January 14, 1998). Notice of baseball facility. Under the Proposed modification of the National Pollutant this proposed permit modification was Agreement, the United States grants a Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) also published in the New Orleans Covenant Not to Sue to the Purchaser general permit for the Western Portion Times Picayune and the Lafayette Daily with respect to existing contamination of the Outer Continental Shelf of the Advisor on June 9, 2001. The comment at the Site in exchange for the Gulf of Mexico (No. GMG290000) for period closed on August 6, 2001. Purchaser’s agreement to pay EPA discharges from new sources, existing Region 6 received comments from the $12,000. In addition, the Purchaser sources, and new dischargers in the Offshore Operators Committee, M–I agrees to provide an irrevocable right of Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and Gas LLC, Baroid Drilling Fluids, Petro- access to representatives of EPA. Extraction Point Source Category (40 Canada, and B.P. Chemicals. For thirty (30) days following the date CFR part 435, subpart A). The modified EPA Region 6 has considered all of publication of this notice, the Agency permit will become effective February comments received. In response to those will receive written comments relating 19, 2002. The existing permit published comments, protocol were included in to the settlement. The Agency will in the Federal Register, at 64 FR 19156 the final permit for the new test consider all comments received and on April 19, 1999, authorizes discharges methods for sediment toxicity and may modify or withdraw its consent to from exploration, development, and biodegradation. A statistical tool was the settlement if comments received production facilities located in and also included in the final permit to disclose facts or considerations which discharging to Federal waters of the Gulf account for variability in those new test indicate that the settlement is of Mexico seaward of the outer methods. Several clarifications were inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. boundary of the territorial seas offshore also made in the permit’s language. The Agency’s response to any comments of Louisiana and Texas. Today’s action The permit modification includes received will be available for public adds the authorization to discharge of limits and monitoring requirements for inspection at One Congress Street, drill cuttings generated using synthetic six new parameters. Monitoring for Boston, MA 02214. and other non-aqueous based drilling those parameters and implementation of
VerDate 11
the required test methods have not OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS previously been required for offshore oil CONTROL POLICY COMMISSION and gas discharges. Industry is therefore expected to need some time to get the Meeting of the Drug Control Research, [CC Docket No. 96–45; DA 01–2841] necessary equipment in place and train Data, and Evaluation Committee personnel prior to beginning the Common Carrier Bureau Seeks monitoring. The effective date of the AGENCY: Office of National Drug Control Comment on Pine Belt Cellular and Pine Belt PCS Petition for Designation permit is being delayed by thirty days Policy. as an Eligible Telecommunications to accommodate those needs. ACTION: Notice of meeting. Carrier in Alabama EPA also expects that many operators will not be able to comply with several SUMMARY: ONDCP will convene a AGENCY: Federal Communications of the permit’s new limits on the meeting of the Drug Control Research, Commission. effective date. Operators may be unable Data, and Evaluation Advisory ACTION: Notice; solicitation of to get new equipment in place to meet Committee on January 17–18, 2002, at comments. the new limits for retention of drilling the White House Conference Center SUMMARY: In a Public Notice in this fluid on drill cuttings. There may be an located at 726 Jackson Place, NW., proceeding released on December 7, insufficient stock of synthetic base Washington, DC. The meeting will begin 2001, the Common Carrier Bureau fluids which comply with the new promptly each day at 9 am and adjourn sought comment on the Pine Belt limits. Also, time will be needed to at 4 pm. The agenda will include Cellular and Pine Belt PCS Petition for complete the 275 day biodegradation general discussion and briefs on Designation as an Eligible test and to develop sufficient laboratory national drug use indicators and other Telecommunications Carrier in capacity and stocks of organisms to federal drug control initiatives Alabama, including the requested conduct the sediment toxicity test. For including, but not limited to the service area. following: (1) Interagency Oxycontin those reasons administrative DATES: Comments are due on or before compliance orders are being issued Work Group Progress Report on an Early January 17, 2002. Reply comments are requiring those discharges not in Warning System for Pharmaceutical due on or before February 1, 2002. compliance with the new limitations to Diversion Abuse; (2) a Redesign ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY comply within six months. Proposal for the Drug Abuse Warning INFORMATION section for where and how The industry has requested an Network (DAWN); (3) ONDCP’s Anti- to file comments. Drug Media Campaign Evaluation; (4) additional delay in the compliance FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2001 National Household Survey on requirements for the 4-day sediment Richard D. Smith or Anita Cheng, Drug Abuse State Estimates of toxicity limit until February 1, 2003. Attorney, or Sheryl Todd, Management There are several complicating factors Treatment Need and Drug Use Analyst, Common Carrier Bureau, that will initially make compliance with Prevalence; (5) The RAMONA Project Accounting Policy Division, (202) 418– the limit more difficult than with the (Random Access Monitoring of 7400 TTY: (202) 418–0484. Narcotics Addicts); (6) HHS’s Report on stock base fluid sediment toxicity limit. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Closing the Drug Abuse Treatment Gap: Since the 4-day sediment toxicity test is November 26, 2001, Pine Belt Cellular used to measure toxicity of discharged A Report to the President of the U.S.; (7) and Pine Belt PCS (Pine Belt) filed with drilling fluids, not just stock base fluids, Updates on Drug Free Communities the Commission a petition under section components and additives to the Grant Program; and (8) Activities related 214(e)(6) seeking designation as an drilling fluids will initially make to: prevention, families, schools, and eligible telecommunications carrier compliance with the limits more workplaces. There will be an (ETC) to receive federal universal difficult. The four day test has been opportunity for public comment from service support for service offered in shown to have more inherent variability 11:30 am to 12 Noon on Thursday, Alabama. Specifically, Pine Belt than the ten day test. Also, demand on January 17, 2002. contends that the Alabama Public laboratories conducting the four day test DATES: January 17–18, 2002, 9 am to Service Commission has provided an will be much greater than for the ten 4:00 pm. Opportunity for public affirmative statement that it lacks day test; thus, there is more of a need comment from 11:30 am to 12:00 noon jurisdiction to consider Pine Belt’s petition, Pine Belt meets all the to build laboratory capacity and develop on Thursday, January 17, 2002. an adequate supply of test organisms. statutory and regulatory prerequisites The administrative compliance order ADDRESSES: White House Conference for ETC designation, and designating will therefore require operators to Center, 726 Jackson Place, NW, Pine Belt as an ETC will serve the comply with the 4-day sediment toxicity Washington, DC. public interest. The Common Carrier Bureau seeks comment on the Pine Belt limit by February 1, 2003. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petition, including the requested service Linda V. Priebe, Assistant General Sam Becker, area. Counsel, Office of National Drug Control The petitioner must provide copies of Acting Director, Water Quality Protection Policy, Washington, DC (202) 395–6622. Division, Region 6. its petition to the Alabama Public [FR Doc. 01–31176 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Dated: December 11, 2001. Service Commission at the time of filing with the Commission. The Commission BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Linda V. Priebe, will also send a copy of this Notice to Assistant General Counsel. the Alabama Public Service Commission [FR Doc. 01–31055 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] by overnight express mail to ensure that BILLING CODE 3180–02–P the Alabama Public Service Commission is notified of the notice and comment period.
VerDate 11
Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5206 Commission’s rules, interested parties the Federal Deposit Insurance (the Stafford Act), as follows: may file comments as follows: Corporation’s Board of Directors will I have determined that the damage in comments are due January 17, 2002, and meet in open session at 1:00 p.m. on certain areas of the State of Alabama, reply comments are due February 1, Thursday, December 20, 2001, to resulting from severe storms and tornadoes 2002. Comments may be filed using the consider the following matters: on November 24–25, 2001, is of sufficient Commission’s Electronic Comment severity and magnitude to warrant a major Discussion Agenda Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper disaster declaration under the Robert T. copies. See Electronic Filing of Memorandum and resolution re: 2002 Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency FDIC Budget. Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121–5206 (the Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, Stafford Act). I, therefore, declare that such 63 FR 24,121 (1998). Comments filed Memorandum and resolution re: a major disaster exists in the State of through the ECFS can be sent as an Revised Policy Statement Regarding Alabama. electronic file via the Internet to
VerDate 11
Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing the Federal Emergency Management continuing, is of sufficient severity and Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Agency under Executive Order 12148, I magnitude to warrant a major disaster Program.) hereby appoint Louis Botta of the declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Federal Emergency Management Agency Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Joe M. Allbaugh, Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121–5206 (the Stafford Director. to act as the Federal Coordinating Act). I, therefore, declare that such a major [FR Doc. 01–31037 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Officer for this declared disaster. disaster exists in the State of Mississippi. I do hereby determine the Territory of BILLING CODE 6718–02–P In order to provide Federal assistance, you Guam to have been affected adversely are hereby authorized to allocate from funds by this declared major disaster: available for these purposes, such amounts as FEDERAL EMERGENCY The Territory of Guam for Public you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and administrative expenses. MANAGEMENT AGENCY Assistance. The Territory of Guam is eligible to You are authorized to provide Individual [FEMA–1397–DR] apply for assistance under the Hazard Assistance in the designated areas, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. Mitigation throughout the State, and any Guam; Major Disaster and Related other forms of assistance under the Stafford Determinations (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Act you may deem appropriate. Consistent Assistance Numbers(CFDA) are to be used for with the requirement that Federal assistance AGENCY: Federal Emergency reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, be supplemental, any Federal funds provided Management Agency (FEMA). Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis ACTION: Notice. will be limited to 75 percent of the total Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services eligible costs. If Public Assistance is later SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment warranted, Federal funds provided under Presidential declaration of a major Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression that program will also be limited to 75 Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family disaster for the Territory of Guam percent of the total eligible costs. Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Further, you are authorized to make (FEMA–1397–DR), dated December 5, Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing changes to this declaration to the extent 2001, and related determinations. Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant allowable under the Stafford Act. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 5, 2001. Program.) The time period prescribed for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe M. Allbaugh, implementation of section 310(a), Madge Dale, Readiness, Response and Priority to Certain Applications for Director. Recovery Directorate, Federal Public Facility and Public Housing Emergency Management Agency, [FR Doc. 01–31035 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705 BILLING CODE 6718–02–P a period not to exceed six months after or [email protected]. the date of this declaration. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Notice is hereby given that pursuant FEDERAL EMERGENCY hereby given that, in a letter dated to the authority vested in the Director of MANAGEMENT AGENCY December 5, 2001, the President the Federal Emergency Management declared a major disaster under the [FEMA–1398–DR] Agency under Executive Order 12148, I authority of the Robert T. Stafford hereby appoint Gracia Szczech of the Disaster Relief and Emergency Mississippi; Major Disaster and Federal Emergency Management Agency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5206 Related Determinations to act as the Federal Coordinating (the Stafford Act), as follows: AGENCY: Federal Emergency Officer for this declared disaster. I do hereby determine the following I have determined that the damage in Management Agency (FEMA). certain areas of the Territory of Guam, areas of the State of Mississippi to have ACTION: resulting from an earthquake on October 13, Notice. been affected adversely by this declared 2001, is of sufficient severity and magnitude SUMMARY: This is a notice of the major disaster: Bolivar, DeSoto, Hinds, to warrant a major disaster declaration under Presidential declaration of a major Humphreys, Madison, Panola, Quitman, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Sunflower, Tate and Washington Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. disaster for the State of Mississippi (FEMA–1398–DR), dated December 7, Counties for Individual Assistance. §§ 5121–5206 (the Stafford Act). I, therefore, All counties within the State of declare that such a major disaster exists in 2001, and related determinations. Mississippi are eligible to apply for the Territory of Guam. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7, 2001. In order to provide Federal assistance, you assistance under the Hazard Mitigation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: are hereby authorized to allocate from funds Grant Program. available for these purposes, such amounts as Madge Dale, Readiness, Response and Recovery Directorate, Federal (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic you find necessary for Federal disaster Assistance Numbers(CFDA) are to be used for assistance and administrative expenses. EmergencyManagement Agency, reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, You are authorized to provide Public Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705 Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Assistance and Hazard Mitigation in the or [email protected]. Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Territory of Guam, and any other forms of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services assistance under the Stafford Act you may hereby given that, in a letter dated Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment deem appropriate. Consistent with the Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression requirement that Federal assistance be December 7, 2001, the President declared a major disaster under the Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family supplemental, any Federal funds provided Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance authority of the Robert T. Stafford Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing or Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 Disaster Relief and Emergency Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant percent of the total eligible costs. Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5206 Program.) Further, you are authorized to make (the Stafford Act), as follows: changes to this declaration to the extent Joe M. Allbaugh, allowable under the Stafford Act. I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State of Mississippi, Director. Notice is hereby given that pursuant resulting from severe storms, tornadoes and [FR Doc. 01–31036 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] to the authority vested in the Director of flooding on November 24, 2001, and BILLING CODE 6718–02–P
VerDate 11
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Dated: December 12, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Robert deV. Frierson, HUMAN SERVICES Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Deputy Secretary of the Board. Mergers of Bank Holding Companies [FR Doc. 01–31056 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention BILLING CODE 6210–01–P The companies listed in this notice [30Day–07–02] have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Reduction Act Review; Correction (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part Sunshine Act Meeting 225), and all other applicable statutes A notice announcing a list of and regulations to become a bank AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Board of information collection requests under holding company and/or to acquire the Governors of the Federal Reserve review by the Office of Management and assets or the ownership of, control of, or System. Budget (OMB) in compliance with the the power to vote shares of a bank or TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m., Wednesday, Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. bank holding company and all of the December 19, 2001. Chapter 35). The State and Local Area banks and nonbanking companies The business of the Board requires Integrated Telephone Survey (SLAITS) owned by the bank holding company, that this meeting be held with less than was published in the Federal Register including the companies listed below. one week’s advance notice to the public on November 27, 2001, (66 FR 59254). and no earlier announcement of the This notice is corrected as follows: The applications listed below, as well meeting was practicable. On page 59254, in the first column, as other related filings required by the PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal the last paragraph, the OMB number Board, are available for immediate Reserve Board Building, C Street should be changed from 0920–0416 to inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank entrance between 20th and 21st Streets, 0920–0406. indicated. The application also will be NW., Washington, DC 20551. All other information and available for inspection at the offices of STATUS: Open. requirements of the November 27, 2001, the Board of Governors. Interested notice remain the same. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: persons may express their views in Summary Agenda: Because of their Dated: December 11, 2001. writing on the standards enumerated in routine nature, no discussion of the Nancy E. Cheal, the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the following items is anticipated. These proposal also involves the acquisition of Acting Associate Director for Policy, matters will be voted on without Planning, and Evaluation, Centers for Disease a nonbanking company, the review also discussion unless a member of the Control and Prevention. includes whether the acquisition of the Board requests that the items be moved [FR Doc. 01–31103 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] nonbanking company complies with the to the discussion agenda. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 1. Proposed 2002 Federal Reserve (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Bank budgets. noted, nonbanking activities will be 2. Proposed 2002—2003 Federal DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND conducted throughout the United States. Reserve Board budget. HUMAN SERVICES Unless otherwise noted, comments 3. Proposed 2002—2003 Office of regarding each of these applications Inspector General’s budget. Food and Drug Administration must be received at the Reserve Bank Note: This meeting will be recorded for the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; indicated or the offices of the Board of benefit of those unable to attend. Notice of Meeting Governors not later than January 11, Cassettes will be available for 2002. listening in the Board’s Freedom of AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, A. Federal Reserve Bank of Information Office, and copies may be HHS. Richmond (A. Linwood Gill, III, Vice ordered for $6 per cassette by calling ACTION: Notice. President) 701 East Byrd Street, (202) 452–3684 or by writing to: Richmond, Virginia 23261–4528: Freedom of Information Office, Board of This notice announces a forthcoming Governors of the Federal Reserve meeting of a public advisory committee 1. First Charter Corporation, System, Washington, D.C. 20551. of the Food and Drug Administration Charlotte, North Carolina; to acquire Contact Person for More Information: (FDA). The meeting will be open to the 5.32 percent of the voting shares of Michelle A. Smith, Assistant to the public. Catawba Valley Bancshares, Inc., Board; 202–452–3204. Name of Committee: Oncologic Drugs Hickory, North Carolina, and thereby SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may Advisory Committee. indirectly acquire Catawba Valley Bank, call 202–452–3206 for a recorded General Function of the Committee: Hickory, North Carolina.. announcement of this meeting; or you To provide advice and B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago may contact the Board’s Web site at recommendations to the agency on (Phillip Jackson, Applications Officer) http://www.federalreserve.gov for an FDA’s regulatory issues. 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, electronic announcement. (The Web site Date and Time: The meeting will be Illinois 60690–1414: also includes procedural and other held on January 31, 2002, from 8:30 a.m. information about the open meeting.) to 3:30 p.m. 1. TCSB Bancorp, Inc., Traverse City, Location: CDER Advisory Committee Michigan; to become a bank holding Dated: December 14, 2001. conference room 1066, 5630 Fishers company by acquiring 100 percent of Robert deV. Frierson, Lane, Rockville, MD. the voting shares of Traverse City State Deputy Secretary of the Board. Contact: Karen M. Templeton-Somers, Bank, Traverse City, Michigan. [FR Doc. 01–31220 Filed 12–14–01; 11:07 Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve am] (HFD–21), Food and Drug System. BILLING CODE 6210–01–P Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
VerDate 11
Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–7001, e- guide (CPG) currently entitled ‘‘Filth on the subject. It does not create or mail: [email protected], or FDA from Insects, Rodents, and Other Pests confer any rights for or on any person Advisory Committee Information Line, in Food.’’ The purpose of this draft CPG and does not operate to bind FDA or the 1–800–741–8138 (301–443–0572 in the is to revise, clarify, and redefine existing public. An alternative approach may be Washington, DC area), code 12542. guidance on the interpretation of filth in used if such an approach satisfies the Please call the Information Line for up- foods within the context of current requirements of applicable statutes or to-date information on this meeting. science. The draft CPG will provide regulations. Agenda: The committee will discuss written guidance to FDA components as This level 1 guidance is being issued supplemental new drug application well as to the industry. consistent with FDA’s good guidance (NDA) 21–386, ZOMETA (zoledronic DATES: Submit written or electronic practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). acid for injection), Novartis comments on this draft CPG by February II. Comments Pharmaceuticals Corp., indicated for the 19, 2002. treatment of bone metastases in patients ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for Interested persons may submit to the with multiple myeloma, breast cancer, single copies of the draft CPG ‘‘Filth Dockets Management Branch (address prostate cancer and other solid tumors. from Insects, Rodents, and Other Pests above) written or electronic comments Procedure: Interested persons may in Food’’ to the Director, Division of on the draft CPG entitled ‘‘Filth from present data, information, or views, Compliance Policy (HFC–230), Office of Insects, Rodents, and Other Pests in orally or in writing, on issues pending Enforcement, Food and Drug Food.’’ Two copies of any comments are before the committee. Written Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, to be submitted, except that individuals submissions may be made to the contact Rockville, MD 20857. Send two self- may submit one copy. Comments person by January 24, 2002. Oral addressed adhesive labels to assist that should be identified with the docket presentations from the public will be office in processing your request, or number found in brackets in the scheduled between approximately 8:45 FAX your request to 301–827–0482. See heading of this document. A copy of the a.m. and 9:45 a.m. Time allotted for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section draft CPG and received comments may each presentation may be limited. Those for electronic access to the document. be seen in the Dockets Management desiring to make formal oral Submit written comments on the draft Branch (address above) between 9 a.m. presentations should notify the contact CPG to the Dockets Management Branch and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. person before January 24, 2002, and (HFA–305), Food and Drug III. Electronic Access submit a brief statement of the general Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. nature of the evidence or arguments 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit Copies of the draft CPG may also be they wish to present, the names and electronic comments to http:// downloaded to a personal computer addresses of proposed participants, and www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments. with access to the Internet. The Office an indication of the approximate time FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of Regulatory Affairs home page requested to make their presentation. Technical Questions Concerning Filth includes the draft CPG and may be After the scientific presentations, a 30- in Foods: Alan R. Olsen, accessed at http://www.fda.gov/ora minute open public session may be Microanalytical Branch (HFS–315), under ‘‘Compliance References.’’ conducted for interested persons who Office of Plant, Dairy Foods, and Dated: December 11, 2001. have submitted their request to speak by Beverages, Center for Food Safety January 24, 2002, to address issues Dennis E. Baker, and Applied Nutrition, Food and Associate Commissioner for Regulatory specific to the topic before the Drug Administration, 200 C St. SW., committee. Affairs. Washington, DC 20204, 202–205– [FR Doc. 01–31024 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Notice of this meeting is given under 4438, FAX 202–205–4091. the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 Questions Concerning Regulatory BILLING CODE 4160–01–S U.S.C. app. 2). Actions: MaryLynn Datoc, Division Dated: December 10, 2001. of Compliance Policy (HFC–230), DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Linda A. Suydam, Office of Enforcement, Office of HUMAN SERVICES Senior Associate Commissioner. Regulatory Affairs, Food and Drug [FR Doc. 01–31025 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, National Institutes of Health Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827– BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 0413, FAX 301–827–0482. Government-Owned Inventions; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Availability for Licensing DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND I. Background AGENCY: National Institutes of Health, HUMAN SERVICES FDA has developed a draft CPG to Public Health Service, DHHS. Food and Drug Administration revise, clarify, and redefine existing ACTION: Notice. guidance on foods that contain filth [Docket No. 01D–0503] from insects, rodents, and other pests to SUMMARY: The inventions listed below Draft Compliance Policy Guide: ‘‘Filth reflect recent advances in science. The are owned by agencies of the U.S. from Insects, Rodents, and Other purpose of this draft CPG is to provide Government and are available for Pests in Food;’’ Availability clear policy to FDA’s field and licensing in the U.S. in accordance with headquarters staff with regard to filth 35 U.S.C. 207 to achieve expeditious AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, from insects, rodents, and other pests in commercialization of results of HHS. foods. It also contains information that federally-funded research and ACTION: Notice. may be useful to the regulated industry development. Foreign patent and to the public. applications are filed on selected SUMMARY: The Food and Drug The draft CPG, when finalized, will inventions to extend market coverage Administration (FDA) is announcing the supersede the current CPG and for companies and may also be available availability of a draft compliance policy represents the agency’s current thinking for licensing.
VerDate 11
ADDRESSES: Licensing information and receptor FPRL1. This modulation may of Scientific Review, National Center for copies of the U.S. patent applications have therapeutic applications in treating Complementary and Alternative Medicine, listed below may be obtained by writing diseases such as infections, organ 6707 Democracy Blvd, Ste 106, Bethesda, MD to the indicated licensing contact at the rejection, rheumatoid arthritis, 20892–5475, (301) 594–2014, Office of Technology Transfer, National atherosclerosis, neoplasms, and [email protected]. Institutes of Health, 6011 Executive amyloidosis. The SAA, an acute phase Dated: December 10, 2001. Boulevard, Suite 325, Rockville, protein, is normally present in serum LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Maryland 20852–3804; telephone: 301/ but increases by 1,000 fold in systemic 496–7057; fax: 301/402–0220. A signed inflammatory conditions and is Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. Confidential Disclosure Agreement will associated with leukocyte migration in be required to receive copies of the these disease states. This technology [FR Doc. 01–31047 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] patent applications. identifies various means to modulate BILLING CODE 4140–01–M the association of SAA and FPRL1 in a Neurotrophic Components of the ADNF SAA–FPRL1 complex or method of I Complex identifying agents that associate with DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Brenneman et al. (NICHD) the complex. It is available for HUMAN SERVICES DHHS Reference No. E–209–01/0 filed immediate licensing and research 12 Sep 2001 collaborations via a Cooperative National Institutes of Health Licensing Contact: Jonathan Dixon; 301/ Research and Development Agreement National Institute of Dental and 496–7056 ext. 270; [email protected] (CRADA). Craniofacial Research; Notice of Neuronal cell death has been Dated: December 10, 2001. Closed Meeting associated with a variety of diseases and Jack Spiegel, conditions, including Alzheimer’s, Director, Division of Technology, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the AIDS-related dementia, Huntington’s Development and Transfer, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Act, as disease, and Parkinson’s disease to Technology Transfer, National Institutes of amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice name a few. Neuronal cell death has Health. is hereby given of the following also been associated with [FR Doc. 01–31048 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] meeting. developmental retardation and learning BILLING CODE 4140–01–P impairments that have lifelong effects The meeting will be closed to the on individuals diagnosed with these public in accordance with the conditions. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND provisions set forth in sections This invention discloses new Activity HUMAN SERVICES 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Dependent Neurotrophic Factor I as amended. The grant applications and (ADNF I) complex polypeptides. National Institutes of Health the discussions could disclose Previously, Activity Dependent confidential trade secrets or commercial National Center for Complementary Neurotrophic Factor (ADNF) property such as patentable material, polypeptides have been shown to and Alternative Medicine; Notice of Closed Meeting and personal information concerning prevent neuronal cell death. ADNF individuals associated with the grant polypeptides are secreted by astroglial Pursuant to section 10(d) of the applications, the disclosure of which cells in the presence of vasoactive Federal Advisory Committee Act, as would constitute a clearly unwarranted intestinal peptide (VIP). These new amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice invasion of personal privacy. ADNF I complex polypeptides are is hereby given of the following effective for reducing neuronal cell meeting. Name of Committee: NIDCR Special Grants death, for reducing oxidative stress, for The meeting will be closed to the Review Committee, Review of R03, F32, K02, reducing condition(s) associated with public in accordance with the K08, K22, K23, K24 Grants. fetal alcohol syndrome in a subject, for provisions set forth in sections Date: February 21–22, 2002. enhancing learning and memory, both 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Time: 8 AM to 5 PM. pre- and post-natally, and for other as amended. The grant applications and Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. conditions. the discussions could disclose Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill With these additional ADNF I confidential trade secrets or commercial Road, Bethesda, MD 20814. complex polypeptides it will be easier property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Yujing Liu, PHD, MD, to target specific receptors in different and personal information concerning cell types and to individually tailor drug Scientific Review Administrator, National individuals associated with the grant Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Res., 45 treatment regimes to those afflicted with applications, the disclosure of which Center Drive, Natcher Building, Rm. 4AN44F, neurodegenerative disorders. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2372. invasion of personal privacy. Utilization of FPRL1 as a Functional (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Receptor by Serum Amyloid A (SAA) Name of Committee: National Center for Program Nos. 93.121, Oral Diseases and Complementary and Alternative Medicine Disorders Research, National Institutes of Ji Ming Wang et al. (NCI) Special Emphasis Panel NCCAM SEP ZAT1 Health, HHS) DHHS Reference No. E–167–99/0 filed K–02. 22 Sep 1999 (PCT/US99/21770, WO Date: January 4, 2002. Dated: December 7, 2001. 01/21188) Time: 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Licensing Contact: Marlene Shinn; 301/ Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications. Director, Office of Federal Advisory 496–7056 ext. 285; Committee Policy. [email protected] Place: 2 Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Conference Room 701, Bethesda, [FR Doc. 01–31043 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] This technology identifies a means for MD 20892. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M modulating the interaction of Serum Contact Person: William A. Kachadorian, Amyloid A (SAA) with its functional PhD., Scientific Review Administrator, Office
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Contact of Person: Angela M. HUMAN SERVICES HUMAN SERVICES Pattatucci-Aragon, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for National Institutes of Health National Institutes of Health Scientific Review, National Institute of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room National Institute of Diabetes and Center for Scientific Review; Notice of 5220, MSC 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, Digestive and Kidney Diseases; Notice Closed Meetings (301) 435–1775. of Closed Meetings Pursuant to section 10(d) of the This notice is being published less Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as than 15 days prior to the meeting due Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice to the timing limitations imposed by the amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following review and funding cycle. is hereby given of the following meetings. Name of Committee: Center for meetings. The meetings will be closed to the Scientific Review Special Emphasis The meetings will be closed to the pubic in accordance with the provisions Panel. public in accordance with the set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and Date: December 19, 2001. provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. Time: 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., The grant applications and the Agenda: To review an evaluate grant as amended. The grant applications and discussions could disclose confidential applications. the discussions could disclose trade secrets or commercial property Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, confidential trade secrets or commercial such a patentable material, and personal MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) property such as patentable material, information concerning individuals Contact Person: Angela M. Pattatucci- and personal information concerning associated with the grant application, Aragon, PhD, Scientific Review individuals associated with the grant the disclosure of which would Administrator, Center for Scientific applications, the disclosure of which constitute a clearly unwarranted Review, National Institutes of Health, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5220, MSC invasion of personal privacy. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific 7852, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Review Special Emphasis Panel. Name of Committee: National Institute of 1775. Date: December 12, 2001. This notice is being published less Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Time: 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. Special Emphasis Panel. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant than 15 days prior to the meeting due Date: January 7, 2002. applications. to the timing limitations imposed by the Time: 3 PM to 4:30 PM. Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD review and funding cycle. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) applications. Contact Person: Alexander D. Politis, PhD, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Place: 2 Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, Boulevard, Room 754, Bethesda, MD 20892, Scientific Review, National Institutes of 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, (Telephone Conference Call). Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4204, 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Contact Person: Lakshmanan Sankaran, MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National PHD, Scientific Review Administrator, 1225, politisacsr.nih.gov. Institute of Health, HHS) Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, Room 754, This notice is being published less than 15 Dated: December 10, 2001. 6707 Democracy Boulevard, National days prior to the meeting due to the timing LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892– limitations imposed by the review and Director, Office of Federal Advisory 6600, (301) 594–7799. funding cycle. Committee Policy. Name of Committee: National Institute of Name of Committee: Center for [FR Doc. 01–31045 Filed 12–18–01; 8:45 am] Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Scientific Review Special Emphasis BILLING CODE 4140–01–M Special Emphasis Panel. Panel. Date: January 8, 2002. Date: December 17, 2001. Time: 8 PM to 5 PM. Time: 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Agenda: To review and evaluate grant HUMAN SERVICES applications. applications. Place: Courtyard By Marriott, 2899 Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA National Institutes of Health 22203, MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) Contact Person: Neal A. Musto, PHD, Contact Person: Daniel R. Kenshalo, Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Scientific Review Administrator, Review PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Closed Meetings Branch, DEA, NIDDK, Room 750, 6707 Center for Scientific Review, National Democracy Boulevard, National Institutes of Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Health, Bethesda, MD 20892–6600, (301) Drive, Room 5176, MSC 7844, Bethesda, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 594–7798, [email protected]. MD 20892, 301–435–1255. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance This notice is being published less is hereby given of the following Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, than 15 days prior to the meeting due meetings. Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; to the timing limitations imposed by the The meetings will be closed to the 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition review and funding cycle. public in accordance with the Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology provisions set forth in sections and Hematology Research, National Institutes Name of Committee: Center for of Health, HHS) Scientific Review Specific Emphasis 552b(c)(4) and 552(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and Dated: December 10, 2001. Panel. Date: December 19, 2001. the discussions could disclose LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Time: 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. confidential trade secrets or commercial Director, Office of Federal Advisory Agenda: To review and evaluate grant property such as patentable material, Committee Policy. applications. and personal information concerning [FR Doc. 01–31044 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, individuals associated with the grant BILLING CODE 4140–01–M MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) applications, the disclosure of which
VerDate 11
would constitute a clearly unwarranted Time: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. information to be collected; and (d) invasion of personal privacy. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant ways to minimize the burden of the applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific collection of information on Place: Holiday Inn Bethesda, 8120 respondents, including through the use Review Special Emphasis Panel. Wisconsin Ave, Bethesda, MD 20814. Date: January 4, 2002. Contact Person: Daniel McPherson, PhD, of automated collection techniques or Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Scientific Review Administrator, Center for other forms of information technology. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of Proposed Project applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5112, Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD MSC 7854, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Title: Emergency Response Grants 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) 1175, [email protected]. Regulations—42 CFR part 51—(OMB Contact Person: Paul K. Strudler, PhD, Name of Committee: Center for Scientific No. 0930–0229, Extension)—This rule Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Review Special Emphasis Panel. implements section 501(m) of the Public Scientific Review, National Institutes of Date: January 20–22, 2002. Health Service Act (42 U.S.C 290aa), Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4100, Time: 7:00 PM to 12:00 PM. MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– which authorizes the Secretary to make Agenda: To review and evaluate grant noncompetitive grants, contracts or 1716. applications. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Place: W. Los Angeles Westwood, 930 cooperative agreements to public Review Special Emphasis Panel. Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024– entities to enable such entities to Date: January 7, 2002. 3033. address emergency substance abuse or Time: 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Contact Person: Lee Rosen, PhD, Scientific mental health needs in local Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Review Administrator, Center for Scientific communities. The rule establishes applications. Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 criteria for determining that a substance Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD Rockledge Drive, Room 5116, MSC 7854, abuse or mental health emergency 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1171. exists, the minimum content for an Contact Person: Robert Weller, PhD, (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance application, and reporting requirements Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, for recipients of such funding. Scientific Review, National Institutes of 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, SAMHSA will use the information in Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3160, 93.337, 93.393–396, 93.837–93.844, 93.846– MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– 93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of the applications to make a 0694. Health, HHS) determination that the requisite need Name of Committee: Center for Scientific exists; that the mental health and/or Dated: December 10, 2001. substance abuse needs are a direct result Review Special Emphasis Panel. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, Date: January 9, 2002. of the precipitating event; that no other Time: 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. Director, Office of Federal Advisory local, State, Tribal or Federal funding Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Committee Policy. sources available to address the need; applications. [FR Doc. 01–31046 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] that there is an adequate plan of Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD BILLING CODE 4140–01–M services; that the applicant has 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) appropriate organizational capability; Contact Person: Paul K. Strudler, PhD, and, that the budget provides sufficient Scientific Review Administrator, Center for DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND justification and is consistent with the Scientific Review, National Institutes of HUMAN SERVICES Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4100, documentation of need and the plan of MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Eligible applicants may apply to the 1716. Services Administration Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Secretary for either of two types of Review Special Emphasis Panel. Agency Information Collection substance abuse and mental health Date: January 10, 2002. Activities: Proposed Collection; emergency response grants: Immediate Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Comment Request awards and Intermediate awards. The Agenda: To review and evaluate grant former are designed to be funded up to applications. In compliance with section $50,000, or such greater amount as Place: Holiday Inn, 8120 Wisconsin 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork determined by the Secretary on a case- Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. Reduction Act of 1995 concerning by-case basis, and are to be used over Contact Person: Sherry L. Dupere, PhD, opportunity for public comment on the initial 90-day period commencing as Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of proposed collections of information, the soon as possible after the precipitating Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 5136, Substance Abuse and Mental Health event; the latter awards require more MSC 7840, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435– Services Administration will publish documentation, including a needs 1021, [email protected]. periodic summaries of proposed assessment, other data and related Name of Committee: Center for Scientific projects. To request more information budgetary detail. The Intermediate Review Special Emphasis Panel. on the proposed projects or to obtain a awards have no predefined budget limit. Date: January 14, 2002. copy of the information collection Typically, Intermediate awards would Time: 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM. plans, call the SAMHSA Reports be used to meet systemic mental health Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Clearance Officer on (301) 443–7978. and/or substance abuse needs during applications. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the recovery period following the Place: NIH, Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD the proposed collections of information Immediate award period. Such awards 20892. (Telephone Conference Call) are necessary for the proper Contact Person: Lee Rosen, PhD, Scientific may be used for up to one year, with a Review Administrator, Center for Scientific performance of the functions of the possible second year supplement based Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 agency, including whether the on submission of additional required Rockledge Drive, Room 5116, MSC 7854, information shall have practical utility; information and data. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1171. (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate This program is an approved user of Name of Committee: Center for Scientific of the burden of the proposed collection the PHS–5161 application form, Review Special Emphasis Panel. of information; (c) ways to enhance the approved by OMB under control Date: January 17–18, 2002. quality, utility, and clarity of the number 0920–0428. The quarterly
VerDate 11
financial status reports in 51d.10(a)(2) in 51d.10(a)(3) and in 51d.10(b)(3–4) are under control number 0990–0169. The and (b)(2) are as permitted by 45 CFR in accordance with 45 CFR 92.50(b). following table presents annual burden 92.41(b); the final program report, Information collection requirements of estimates for the information collection financial status report and final voucher 45 CFR part 92 are approved by OMB requirements of this regulation.
Burden/re- 42 CFR citation Number of Responses/ sponse Total burden respondents respondent (hrs.) (hrs.)
Immediate award application: 51d.4(a) and 51d.6(a)(2) ...... 3 1 3 * (9) Intermediate award application: 51d.4(b) and 51d.6(a)(2)—Intermediate Awards ...... 3 1 10 * (30) 51d.10(a)(1)—Immediate awards—mid-program report if applicable ...... 3 1 2 * (6) Final report content for both types of award: 51d.10(c) ...... 6 1 3 18
Total ...... 6 18 * This burden is carried under OMB control number 0920–0428.
Send comments to Nancy Pearce, two Safe Harbor Agreement permits endangered species are found in 50 CFR SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the 17.32 and 17.22. Room 16–105, Parklawn Building, 5600 Act. Two applicants also withdrew their Between February 17, 2001, and Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. permit applications after their Plans had November 14, 2001, Region 1 of the Written comments should be received been noticed in the Federal Register for Service issued the following permits for within 60 days of this notice. public comment. Copies of the permits incidental take of threatened and Dated: December 11, 2001. and associated decision documents are endangered species, pursuant to section Richard Kopanda, available upon request. Charges for 10(a)(1)(B) and section 10(a)(1)(A) of the copying (10 cents per page), plus Executive Officer, SAMHSA. Act. We issued each permit after making shipping and handling may apply. [FR Doc. 01–31110 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] the following determinations: the ADDRESSES: If you would like copies of BILLING CODE 4162–20–P application had been submitted in good any of the above documents, please faith; all permit issuance criteria were contact the Fish and Wildlife Reference met, including the requirement that Service, 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR granting the permit will not jeopardize 110, Bethesda, Maryland 20814; the continued existence of listed Fish and Wildlife Service telephone (800) 582–3421. species; and the permit was consistent FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with the Act and applicable regulations, Notice of Decision and Availability of Heather Hollis, Fish and Wildlife including a thorough review of the Decision Documents on the Issuance Biologist, Fish and Wildlife Service, environmental effects of the action and of Permits for Incidental Take of Portland, Oregon; telephone (503) 231– alternatives pursuant to the National Threatened and Endangered Species 6241. Environmental Policy Act of 1969. AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 9 Copies of these permits, their Interior. of the Act and Federal regulation accompanying Plans, and associated ACTION: Notice of decision. prohibit the take of wildlife species documents are available upon request. listed as endangered or threatened, Decision documents for each permit SUMMARY: Between February 17, 2001, respectively. Under the Act, the term include Findings and and November 14, 2001, Region 1 of the ‘‘take’’ means to harass, harm, pursue, Recommendations; a Biological Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, Opinion; and either a Finding of No approved seven Habitat Conservation or collect listed wildlife, or to attempt Significant Impact, a Record of Plans (Plans) and issued seven to engage in any such conduct. The Decision, or an Environmental Action associated permits and transferred three Service may, under limited Statement. Associated documents may permits for the incidental take of circumstances, issue permits to also include an Implementing threatened and endangered species authorize take that is incidental to, and Agreement, Assumption Agreement, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the not the purpose of, carrying out an Environmental Assessment, or Endangered Species Act of 1973, as otherwise lawful activity. Regulations Environmental Impact Statement, as amended (Act). The Service also issued governing permits for threatened and applicable.
Issuance Approved plan/permit Permit No. date
Habitat Conservation Plans: John Lang Homes, Cantata—permit transfer ...... TE835424–0 03/22/01 San Joaquin Valley Multispecies ...... TE043280–0 05/31/01 Tacoma Water ...... TE044757–0 07/06/01 El Sobrante Landfill ...... TE040421–0 07/24/01 Reichel et al. Permit Transfers ...... TE046730–0 08/10/01 TE046731–0 08/10/01 Keig Wildcat Line ...... TE040317–0 09/12/01 Boise Cascade Low-effect ...... TE028219–0 09/13/01
VerDate 11
Issuance Approved plan/permit Permit No. date
Deer Canyon Park ...... TE035929–0 09/17/01 City of Highland Roadways Project ...... TE049462–0 10/29/01 Safe Harbor Agreements: Nene Reintroduction, Puu O Hoku Ranch ...... TE028990–0 08/22/01 Russell Pond, Oregon Chub ...... TE042953–0 09/24/01
In addition to issuing the above ADDRESSES: Scoping comments should proposed under this modification, and permits, the Service ceased processing be sent to the Bureau of Land the expansion of the Pipeline/South two permit applications after the Management, Battle Mountain Field Pipeline open pit was defined in this applicants withdrew their permit Office, Attention: Pam Jarnecke, 50 EIS as a Reasonably Foreseeable Action. applications. Both International Paper Bastian Road, Battle Mountain, Nevada and Crown Pacific withdrew their 89820. Comments, including names and Gerald M. Smith, permit applications after both had street addresses of respondents, will be Field Manager, Battle Mountain Field Office. developed draft HCPs that had been available for public review at the Battle [FR Doc. 01–31185 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] available for public review. Mountain Field Office located in Battle BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P Dated: November 20, 2001. Mountain, Nevada, during regular Rowan Gould, business hours, and may be published as part of the EIS. Individual INTERNATIONAL TRADE Deputy Regional Director, Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland, Oregon. respondents may request COMMISSION confidentiality. If you wish to withhold [FR Doc. 01–31104 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] [Investigation No. 332–288] your name or street address from public BILLING CODE 4310–55–P review or from disclosure under the Ethyl Alcohol for Fuel Use: Freedom of Information Act, you must Determination of the Base Quantity of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR state this prominently at the beginning Imports of your written comment. Such requests Bureau of Land Management will be honored to the extent allowed by AGENCY: United States International law. All submissions from organizations Trade Commission. [NV–060–1990] and businesses, and from individuals ACTION: Notice of Determination. identifying themselves as Notice of Intent To Prepare a SUMMARY: Section 7 of the Steel Trade Supplemental Environmental Impact representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be Liberalization Program Implementation Statement to Analyze the Proposed Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2703 note), Modification to the Pipeline Plan of available for public inspection in their entirety. which concerns local feedstock Operations for the Pipeline/South requirements for fuel ethyl alcohol Pipeline Pit Expansion FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jarnecke, Battle Mountain BLM, at (775) imported by the United States from CBI- AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management. 635–4144. beneficiary countries, requires the Commission to determine annually the COOPERATING AGENCY: Nevada Division SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. domestic market for fuel ethyl of Wildlife. actions associated with the project alcohol during the 12-month period ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a would consist of the following: ending on the preceding September 30. supplemental environmental impact • Expansion of the South Pipeline pit The domestic market determination statement to analyze the proposed southwest into the Gap mineralized made by the Commission is to be used modification to the Pipeline Plan of area. Operations for the Pipeline/South • Expansion of the South Pipeline ore to establish the ‘‘base quantity’’ of Pipeline Pit Expansion, Lander County, deposit southeast into the Crossroads imports that can be imported with a Nevada, and notice of scoping period. mineralized area. zero percent local feedstock • Deepening of the Pipeline/South requirement. The base quantity to be SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) Pipeline open pit from the currently used by the U.S. Customs Service in the of the National Environmental Policy approved 4120-foot elevation (above administration of the law is the greater Act of 1969 (NEPA), 40 Code of Federal mean sea level—amsl) to at least 3600- of 60 million gallons or 7 percent of U.S. Regulations 1500–1508 Council on foot elevation amsl. consumption as determined by the Environmental Quality Regulations, and • Increasing the approved height of Commission. Beyond the base quantity 43 Code of Federal Regulations 3809, 250 feet for the Pipeline/South Pipeline of imports, progressively higher local the Bureau of Land Management’s Battle waste rock dump to 400 feet. feedstock requirements are placed on Mountain Field Office will be directing • Increasing the mining rate from an imports of fuel ethyl alcohol and the preparation of a Supplemental average 150,000 tons per day (tpd) to an mixtures from the CBI-beneficiary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) average 250,000 tpd, with a maximum countries. to analyze a proposed pit expansion. of 400,000 tpd. For the 12-month period ending The EIS will be prepared by a third • Translocate waste rock as partial fill September 30, 2001, the Commission party contractor directed by the BLM. in the Pipeline/South Pipeline open pit, has determined the level of U.S. The project will involve public and including portions of the expanded pit. consumption of fuel ethyl alcohol to be private lands in Lander County, Nevada. The life of the project under this 1.72 billion gallons. Seven percent of DATES: Written comments on the scope modification would increase seven this amount is 120.3 million gallons of the EIS must be post-marked or years over the time line outlined in the (these figures have been rounded). otherwise delivered by 4:30 p.m. on South Pipeline Final EIS (BLM 2000). Therefore, the base quantity for 2002 January 17, 2002. No additional surface disturbance is should be 120.3 million gallons.
VerDate 11
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requirements of section 222 of the Act The workers firm does not produce an Devry Boughner (202) 205–3313, must be met. article as required for certification under [email protected], in the (1) That a significant number or Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. Commission’s Office of Industries. For proportion of the workers in the TA–W–39,382; Allied Vaughn, Clinton, information on legal aspects of the workers’ firm, or an appropriate TN investigation contact Mr. William subdivision thereof, have become totally TA–W–39,693; Winkel Industries, Inc., Gearhart, [email protected], of the or partially separated, Confield, OH Commission’s Office of the General (2) That sales or production, or both, The investigation revealed that Counsel at (202) 205–3091. of the firm or subdivision have criteria (2) and (3) have not been met. Hearing-impaired individuals are decreased absolutely, and Sales or production did not decline advised that information on this matter (3) That increases of imports of during the relevant period as required can be obtained by contacting our TDD articles like or directly competitive with for certification. Increased imports did terminal on (202) 205–1810. articles produced by the firm or not contribute importantly to worker appropriate subdivision have separations at the firm. Background contributed importantly to the TA–W–39,878; Pennzoil/Quaker State For purposes of making separations, or threat thereof, and to the Co., Shreveport Refinery, determinations of the U.S. market for absolute decline in sales or production. fuel ethyl alcohol as required by section Shreveport, LA Negative Determinations for Worker 7 of the Act, the Commission instituted Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance Investigation No. 332–288, Ethyl Adjustment Assistance In each of the following cases the Alcohol for Fuel Use: Determination of The following certifications have been investigation revealed that criterion (3) the Base Quantity of Imports, in March issued; the date following the company has not been met. A survey of customers 1990. The Commission uses official name and location of each indicted that increased imports did not statistics of the U.S. Department of determination references the impact contribute importantly to worker Energy to make these determinations as date for all workers of such separations at the firm. well as the PIERS database of the determination. Journal of Commerce, which is based on TA–W–39,869; Cognis Corp/ Lock TA–W–39,954 & A; Pulp and Paper of U.S. export declarations. Haven, Castanea, PA America, Berlin, NH and Gorham, Section 225 of the Customs and Trade TA–W–39,979; Fort Atkinson Industries, NH: August 21, 2000. Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–382, August Fort Atkinson, WI TA–W–40,046; Parker Hannifim Corp., 20, 1990) amended the original language TA–W–39,471; Besser Co., Alpena, MI Integrated Hydraulics Div., set forth in the Steel Trade TA–W–39,880; Tuscarora Yarns, James Lincolnshire, IL: August 31, 2000. Liberalization Program Implementation C. Fry Plant, Kinston, NC TA–W–39,619; Converse, Inc., Charlotte, Act of 1989. The amendment requires TA–W–39,724; L.E. Smith Glass Co., Mt. NC: June 25, 2000. the Commission to make a Pleasant, PA TA–W–39,616; United States Ceramic determination of the U.S. domestic TA–W–38,944; Crane Pumps and Tile Co., East Sparta, OH: June 24, market for fuel ethyl alcohol for each Systems, Piqua, OH 2000. year after 1989. TA–W–39,882; JSJ Corp., Grand Haven TA–W–39,401; Industrial Seaming Co., South Plant, Grand Haven, MI By order of the Commission. Inc., Granite Falls, NC: June 14, TA–W–39,312; Formtech Enterprises, Issued: December 12, 2001. 2000. Orwigsburg, PA Donna R. Koehnke, TA–W–38,974; Randy Industries, Inc., Secretary. In the following cases, the New York, NY: March 26, 2000. [FR Doc. 01–31057 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] investigation revealed that the criteria TA–W–39,536; Georgia-Pacific Corp., BILLING CODE 7020–02–P for eligibility have not been met for the West, Bellingham, WA: June 15, reasons specified. 2000. Increased imports did not contribute TA–W–39,613; Dutton Manufacturing, importantly to worker separations at the Laconia, NH: June 27, 2000. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR firm. TA–W–40,264; Winona Knitting Mills, TA–W–39,579; Newell Window Employment and Training Div. of Hampshire Designers, Inc., Furnishing, Inc./Kirsch, Waco, TX Administration Winona, MN: April 15, 2001. TA–W–40,274; A.O. Smith Corp., TA–W–39,359; G.E. Marquette Medical, Notice of Determinations Regarding Electrical Products Co., Owosso, MI d/b/a Corometrics, Wallingford, CT: Eligibility To Apply for Worker TA–W–39,950; Antec Network Plastics, May 15, 2001. Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA a/k/a Arris, El Paso, TX TA–W–39,695; PEC of America Corp., Transitional Adjustment Assistance TA–W–40,121; Connelly North America, Santee, CA: July 11, 2000. El Paso, TX TA–W–39,473; Boston Scientific Corp., In accordance with section 223 of the TA–W–40,052 & A; Emsar, Inc., Watertown, MA: June 7, 2000. Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the Bridgeport, CT and Stratford, CT TA–W–40,092; MICTEC, Inc., Department of Labor herein presents TA–W–39,417; Innovex, Inc., Chandler, Canonsburg, PA: September 7, summaries of determinations regarding AZ 2000. eligibility to apply for trade adjustment TA–W–39,414; Marshall and Williams TA–W–39,986; Lexington Fabrics, Inc., assistance for workers (TA–W) issued Products, Inc., Providence, RI Geraldine, AL: August 22, 2000. during the period of November, 2001. TA–W–39,778; Coats North America, TA–W–39,177; Wand Tool Co., Inc., In order for an affirmative Thomasville, GA Wheeling, IL: April 5, 2000. determination to be made and a TA–W–40,048; Three-Five Systems, Inc., TA–W–39,389; Precision Marshall Steel certification of eligibility to apply for Tempe, AZ Co., Washington, PA: May 12, 2000. worker adjustment assistance to be TA–W–39,849; Square D, Scheider TA–W–39,963 & A; Thomasville issued, each of the group eligibility Electric, Huntington, IN Furniture Industries, Inc., West
VerDate 11
Jefferson Plant, West Jefferson, NC NAFTA–TAA–05382; Wilson Sporting Dated: November 30, 2001. and Sawmills Plant, Hudson, NC: Goods Co., Racquet Sports, Edward A. Tomchick, August 15, 2000. Fountain Inn, SC Director, Division of Trade Adjustment TA–W–39,957 & A, B; Acushnet Rubber NAFTA–TAA–05445; Graphic Assistance. Co., Inc., Belleville Facility, New Packaging Portland, OR [FR Doc. 01–31147 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Bedford, MA, Riverside Facility, NAFTA–TAA–05289; JSJ Corp., Grand BILLING CODE 4510–30–M New Bedford, MA and Warehouse, Haven South Plant, Grand Haven, New Bedford, MA: August 15, 2000. MI NAFTA–TAA–04793; Johnstown Also, pursuant to Title V of the North DEPARTMENT OF LABOR America Corp., Freight Car Div., American Free Trade Agreement Johnstown, PA Employment and Training Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103–182) NAFTA–TAA–05257; J.T. Fennell Co., Administration concerning transitional adjustment Inc., Chillicothe, IL assistance hereinafter called (NAFTA– [TA–W–38,693 AND NAFTA–04514] NAFTA–TAA–05249; Anvil TAA) and in accordance with section International, Inc., Statesboro, GA 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, Summit Timber Co., Darrington, WA; NAFTA–TAA–05210; Elastic of the Trade Act as amended, the Notice of Negative Determination on Corporation of America, Inc., Department of Labor presents Reconsideration Hemingway, SC summaries of determinations regarding NAFTA–TAA–05179; Pennzoil/Quaker On September 24, 2001, the eligibility to apply for (NAFTA–TAA) State Co., Shreveport Refinery, Department issued an Affirmative issued during the month of November, Shreveport, LA Determination Regarding Application 2001. The workers firm does not produce an for Reconsideration for the workers and In order for an affirmative article as required for certification under former workers of the subject firm. The determination to be made and a section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, notice as published in the Federal certification of eligibility to apply for Title II, of the trade Act of 1974, as Register on October 19, 2001 (66 FR (NAFTA–TAA) the following group amended. 53253). eligibility requirements of Section 250 The Department initially denied TAA of the Trade Act must be met: NAFTA–TAA–04985; Winona, Inc., to workers of Summit Timber Company (1) That a significant number of Nashville, IN because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’ proportion of the workers in the NAFTA–TAA–04942; Allied Vaughn, group eligibility requirement of section worker’s firm, or an appropriate Clinton, TN 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as subdivision thereof, (including workers Affirmative Determinations NAFTA– amended, was not met. None of the in any agricultural firm or appropriate TAA customers increased their import subdivision thereof) have become totally purchases of softwood dismenional NAFTA–TAA–05380; Joplin or partially separated from employment lumber, while reducing their purchases Manufacturing, Orica USA, Inc., and either— from the subject firm. Joplin, MO: September 26, 2000. (2) That sales or production, or both, The Department denied NAFTA–TAA NAFTA–TAA–05489; Arvin Meritor, because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’ of such firm or subdivision have Fayette, AL: October 19, 2000. decreased absolutely, group eligibility requirement of Section NAFTA–TAA–04788; J and L Speciality 250 was not met and because there was (3) That imports from Mexico or Steel, Inc., Midland, PA: April 14, Canada of articles like or directly no shift in production to either Mexico 2000. or Canada. None of the customers competitive with articles produced by NAFTA–TAA–05313; Bolivar Tees, such firm or subdivision have increased, increased their import purchases of Bolivar, MO: September 4, 2000. softwood dimensional lumber from and that the increases imports NAFTA–TAA–05167; Coats North contributed importantly to such Canada or Mexico, while reducing their America, Thomasville, GA: July 18, purchases from the subject firm. workers’ separations or threat of 2000. separation to the decline in sales or The workers at the subject firm were NAFTA–TAA–05356; Eaton Corp., engaged in employment related to the production of such firm or subdivision Torque Control Products Div., or production of softwood dimensional Marshall, MI: September 18, 2000. lumber. (4) That there has been a shift in NAFTA–TAA–05012; Jaymar-Ruby, Inc., The company supplied an additional production by such workers’ firm or d/b/a Trans Apparel Group, list of customers that they believed were subdivision to Mexico or Canada of Michigan City, IN: June 13, 2000. importing softwood dimensional articles like or directly competitive with NAFTA–TAA–05417 & A; FCI USA, Inc., lumber. articles which are produced by the firm Fremont, CA and Cypress, CA: On reconsideration, the Department or subdivision. October 8, 2000. conducted a survey of Summit Timber Negative Determinations (NAFTA– NAFTA–TAA–05283; W P Textile Company’s additional customer list TAA) Processing Corp., Richmond, VA: regarding their purchases of softwood September 4, 2000. dimensional lumber during 1999, 2000 In each of the following cases the I hereby certify that the and January through September 2001. investigation revealed that criteria (3) aforementioned determinations were The survey revealed that there were no and (4) were not met. Imports from issued during the month of November, meaningful increased customer Canada or Mexico did not contribute 2001. Copies of these determinations are purchases of imported (including from importantly to workers’ separations. available for inspection in Room C– Canada or Mexico) softwood There was no shift in production from 5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 dimensional lumber, while customers the subject firm to Canada or Mexico Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, decreased their purchases from the during the relevant period. DC 20210 during normal business hours subject plant during the relevant period. NAFTA–TAA–04972; Besser Co., or will be mailed to persons who write Any customer import purchases of Alpena, MI to the above address. softwood lumber were relatively small
VerDate 11
in relation to the declines in sales at the Certification of Eligibility to Apply for workers separated from employment at subject firm. Worker Adjustment Assistance on ARA Cutting, LC had their wages September 27, 2001, applicable to reported under two separate Conclusion workers of The Bramton Co., Retail unemployment insurance (UI) tax After reconsideration, I affirm the Products Group, Dallas, Texas. The accounts; ADP Total Source FL XZII, original notice of negative notice was published in the Federal Inc., Miami, Florida and United determinations regarding eligibility to Register on October 11, 2001 (66 FR Enterprises of Southwest Florida. Inc., apply for worker adjustment assistance 51973). d/b/a Fidelity United Miami, Florida. and NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment At the request of the State agency, the Accordingly, the Department is Assistance for workers and former Department reviewed the certification amending the certification to properly workers of Summit Timber Company, for workers of the subject firm. New reflect this matter. Darrington, Washington. findings show that the Department The intent of the Department’s Signed at Washington, DC, this 28th day of incorrectly identified the subject firm certification is to include all workers of November 2001. name. The Department is amending the ARA Cutting, LC adversely affected by Edward A. Tomchick, certification determination to correctly increased imports. Director, Division of Trade Adjustment identify the subject firm title name to The amended notice applicable to Assistance. read The Aquaterra Biochemical Corp. TA–W–38,452 is hereby issued as [FR Doc. 01–31149 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] of America, Retail Products Group follows: BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Manufacturing, Retail Products Group, All workers of the ARA Cutting, LC, The Bramton Co. Miami, Florida, including those receiving The amended notice applicable to their compensation through ADP Total DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TA–W–40,025 is hereby issued as Source FL XZII, Inc., Miami, Florida and follows: United Enterprises of Southwest Florida, Employment and Training Inc., d/b/a Fidelity United, Miami, Florida, All workers of The Aquaterra Biochemical Administration who became totally or partially separated Corp. of America, Retail Products Group from employment on or after December 6, [TA–W–39,644] Manufacturing, Retail Products Group, The 1999, through February 13, 2003, are eligible Bramton Co., Dallas, Texas, engaged in the to apply for adjustment assistance under A–1 Manufacturing Inc.; Garment production of sewing cloth pet products, who section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974. Corporation of America; Brilliant, AL; became totally or partially separated from Notice of Termination of Investigation employment on or after August 20, 2000, Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of through September 27, 2003, are eligible to December, 2001. Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade apply for adjustment assistance under Linda G. Poole, Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974. Act of 1974, an investigation was Certifying Officer, Division of Trade initiated on July 16, 2001 in response to Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of Adjustment Assistance a worker petition which was filed on November, 2001. [FR Doc. 01–31151 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] behalf of workers at A–1 Manufacturing, Linda G. Poole, BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Inc., Brilliant, Alabama. Certifying Officer, Division of Trade An active certification covering the Adjustment Assistance. petitioning group of workers is already [FR Doc. 01–31152 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR in effect (TA–W–39,204, as amended). BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Consequently, further investigation in Employment and Training this case would serve no purpose, and Administration the investigation has been terminated. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR [TA–W–39,224] Dated: Signed in Washington, DC this 13th day of August, 2001. Employment and Training Centis, Inc.; Formerly Known as 20th Linda G. Poole, Administration Century Plastics; Brea, CA; Amended Certifying Officer, Division of Trade [TA–W–38,452] Certification Regarding Eligibility To Adjustment Assistance. Apply for Worker Adjustment [FR Doc. 01–31138 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] ARA Cutting, LC, Miami, FL; Amended Assistance BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment In accordance with section 223 of the Assistance Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Department of Labor issued a In accordance with Section 223 of the Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Employment and Training Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), the Worker Adjustment Assistant on August Administration Department of Labor issued a 20, 2001, applicable to workers of Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Centis, Inc., Brea, California. The notice [TA–W–40,025] Worker Adjustment Assistance on was published in the Federal Register The Aquaterra Biochemical Corp. of February 13, 2001, applicable to on September 11, 2001 (66 FR 47243). America, Retail Products Group workers of ARA Cutting, LC, Miami, At the request of the State agency, the Manufacturing, Retail Products Group, Florida. The notice was published in the Department reviewed the certification the Bramton Company, Dallas, TX; Federal Register on April 5, 2001 (66 FR for workers of the subject firm. The Amended Certification Regarding 18118). workers are engaged in the production Eligibility To Apply for Worker At the request of the State agency, the of thin sheer transparent plastic page Adjustment Assistance Department reviewed the certification protectors. The subject firm originally for workers of the subject firm. The named 20th Century Plastics was In accordance with section 223 of the workers were engaged in the production renamed Centis, Inc. in January 2000. Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the of pants and shorts. New information The State agency reports that some Department of Labor issued a provided by the State shows that workers wages at the subject firm are
VerDate 11
being reported under the Conclusion DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax account for Centis, Inc., formerly known After careful consideration of the new Employment and Training as 20th Century Plastics, Brea, facts obtained on reconsideration, it is Administration concluded that increases in imports of California. [TA–W–39, 154] Accordingly, the Department is articles like or directly competitive with amending the certification to properly dyed and finished fabric produced at Jonathan Manufacturing, d/b/a/ reflect this matter. the subject firm contributed importantly Jonathan Engineered Solutions, to the decline in sales or production and The intent of the Department’s Fullerton, CA; Amended Certification to the total or partial separation of certification is to include all workers of Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Centis, Inc. who were adversely affected workers of that firm. In accordance with Worker Adjustment Assistance the provisions of the Trade Act of 1974, by imports. In accordance with section 223 of the I make the following revised The amended notice applicable to Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the determination: TA–W–39,224 is hereby issued as Department of Labor issued a follows: All workers of Color-Tex International, Certification of Eligibility to Apply for North Carolina Finishing Division, Salibury, All workers of Centis Inc., formerly known Worker Adjustment Assistance on May as 20th Century Plastics, Brea, California who North Carolina, who became totally or 8, 2001, applicable to workers of became totally or partially separated from partially separated from employment on or Jonathan Engineered Solutions, employment on or after April 25, 2000, after October 4, 1999, through two years from Fullerton, California. The notice was through August 20, 2003, are eligible to apply the date of this issuance, are eligible to apply published in the Federal Register on for adjustment assistance under Section 223 for adjustment assistance under Section 223 May 23, 2001 (66 FR 28554). of the Trade Act of 1974. of the Trade Act of 1974. At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of November, 2001. for workers of the subject firm. The October 2001. workers are engaged in the activities Linda G. Poole, Linda G. Poole, related to the production of aluminum Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Certifying Officer, Division of Trade slides (assembly and fabrication). The Adjustment Assistance. Adjustment Assistance. workers are separately identifiable from [FR Doc. 01–31141 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–31146 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] workers producing steel slides at the BILLING CODE 4510–30–M BILLING CODE 4510–30–M subject plant. New information provided by the State shows that Jonathan DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Manufacturing is the parent firm of Employment and Training Jonathan Engineered Solutions, Administration Employment and Training Fullerton, California. Information also Administration shows that some of the claimants’ wages are reported under the Unemployment [TA–W–38,243] [TA–W–39,819] Insurance (UI) tax account for Jonathan Color-Tex International, North Carolina Manufacturing, d/b/a Jonathan Finishing Division, Salisbury, North Engineered Sintered Components Engineered Solutions, Fullerton, Carolina; Notice of Revised Troutman, NC; Notice of Termination California. The intent of the Department’s Determination on Reconsideration of Investigation certification is to include all workers of On April 16, 2001, the Department Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Jonathan Engineered Solutions who issued a notice of affirmative Act of 1974, and investigation was were adversely affected by imports. determination regarding application for initiated on August 13, 2001 in response Accordingly, the Department is reconsideration of the denial of trade to a worker petition which was filed by amending the certification to properly adjustment assistance for workers of the reflect this matter. a company official on behalf of workers The amended notice applicable to subject firm. The notice was published at Engineered Sintered Components, TA–W–39,154 is hereby issued as in the Federal Register on May 3, 2001 Troutman, North Carolina. follows: (66 FR 22263). The petitioner has requested that the Workers of Color-Tex International, All workers of Jonathan Manufacturing , D/ petition be withdrawn. Consequently, B/A Jonathan Engineered Solutions, North Carolina Finishing Division, further investigation in this case would Fullerton, California, engaged in employment Salisbury, North Carolina, engaged in serve no purpose, and their related to the production of aluminum slides employment related to dying and investigation has been terminated. (fabrication and assembly) who became finishing fabric, were initially denied totally or partially separated from TAA because the ‘‘contributed Signed in Washington, DC this 28th day of employment on or after April 6, 2000, importantly’’ criterion of the Trade Act November, 2001. through May 8, 2003, are eligible to apply for of 1974, as amended, was not met. Linda G. Poole, adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974. The petitioner provided a listing of Certifying Officer, Division of Trade additional customers of the subject firm. Adjustment Assistance. Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of A survey of the additional customers [FR Doc. 01–31145 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] November, 2001. revealed that they had reduced BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Linda G. Poole, purchases from North Carolina Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Finishing and increased imports of dyed Adjustment Assistance. and finished fabric during the time [FR Doc. 01–31153 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] period relevant to the investigation. BILLING CODE 4510–30–M
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR The purpose of each of the subject matter of the investigations to investigations is to determine whether the Director, Division of Trade Employment and Training the workers are eligible to apply for Adjustment Assistance, at the address Administration adjustment assistance under Title II, shown below, not later than December chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations 28, 2001. Investigations Regarding Certifications will further relate, as appropriate, to the The petitions filed in this case are of Eligibility To Apply for Worker determination of the date on which total Adjustment Assistance or partial separations began or available for inspection at the Office of threatened to begin and the subdivision the Director, Division of Trade Petitions have been filed with the of the firm involved. Adjustment Assistance, Employment Secretary of Labor under section 221(a) The petitioners or any other persons and Training Administration, U.S. of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and showing a substantial interest in the Department of Labor, Room C–5311, 200 are identified in the Appendix to this subject matter of the investigations may Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, request a public hearing, provided such DC 20210. the Director of the Division of Trade request is filed in writing with the Signed at Washington, DC this 19th day of Adjustment Assistance, Employment Director, Division of Trade Adjustment November, 2001. Assistance, at the address shown below, and Training Administration, has Edward A. Tomchick, instituted investigations pursuant to not later than December 28, 2001. Interested persons are invited to Director, Division of Trade Adjustment section 221 (a) of the Act. submit written comments regarding the Assistance.
APPENDIX [Petitions instituted on 11/19/2001]
Date of TA–W Subject firm (petitioners) Location petition Product(s)
40,356 ..... Littonian Shoe (Co.) ...... Littlestown, PA ...... 11/13/2001 Children’s Shoes. 40,357 ..... Flextronics International (Co.) ...... Palm Harbor, FL ...... 11/07/2001 Assemble Electronic Boards. 40,358 ..... Precon New Products (Wkrs) ...... Boise, ID ...... 10/29/2001 Retractable Phone Cards. 40,359 ..... Nocona Athletic Goods (Co.) ...... Nocona, TX ...... 10/18/2001 Baseball Gloves and Mitts. 40,360 ..... Reptron Manufacturing (Wkrs) ...... Gaylord, MI ...... 11/08/2001 Electronic Circuit Boards. 40,361 ..... Donaldson Company (Co.) ...... Bloomington, MN ...... 11/09/2001 Air Cleaning Equipment. 40,362 ..... American Tissue Mills (Wkrs) ...... Augusta, ME ...... 11/05/2001 Tissue Paper. 40,363 ..... William Carter Co. (The) (Co.) ...... Barnesville, GA ...... 11/09/2001 Children’s Apparel. 40,364 ..... Nutec Tooling Systems (Co.) ...... Meadville, PA ...... 10/15/2001 Design and Build Jigs and Fixtures. 40,365 ..... Saucony, Inc (Co.) ...... Bangor, ME ...... 11/09/2001 Athletic Footwear.
OTAA INSTITUTIONS [Petitions Instituted on 11/19/2001; Contact: Regina Chapman (202) 219–5555]
Subject firm Date of (petitioners) Location Contact person Telephone TA–W No. petition
Littonian Shoe (Co.) ...... Littlestown, PA ...... Laverne L. Leese .. 717–359–5194 40,356 11/13/2001 Flextronics International (Co.) ...... Palm Harbor, FL ... John Robinson ...... 727–939–4417 40,357 11/07/2001 Precon New Products (Wkrs) ...... Boise, ID ...... John Quapp ...... 208–323–1003 40,358 10/29/2001 Nocona Athletic Goods (Co.) ...... Nocona, TX ...... Robert M Storey, 940–825–3326 40,359 10/18/2001 Jr. Reptron Manufacturing (Wkrs) ...... Gaylord, MI ...... Lindsey Adams ..... 989–732–6244 40,360 11/08/2001 Donaldson Company (Co.) ...... Bloomington, MN .. Steve Michel ...... 952–887–3555 40,361 11/09/2001 American Tissue Mills (Wkrs) ...... Augusta, ME ...... Craig Gray ...... 207–622–9900 40,362 11/05/2001 William Carter Co. (The) (Co.) ...... Barnesville, GA ..... Tammie T. Merritt 770–233–2140 40,363 11/09/2001 Nutec Tooling Systems (Co.) ...... Meadville, PA ...... Bruce Courtney ..... 814–724–6336 40,364 10/15/2001 Saucony, Inc (Co.) ...... Bangor, ME ...... Kerry Smith ...... 978–532–9000 40,365 11/09/2001
[FR Doc. 01–31137 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the Director of the Division of Trade BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Adjustment Assistance, Employment Employment and Training and Training Administration, has Administrative instituted investigations pursuant to section 221(a) of the Act. Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker The purposes of each of the Adjustment Assistance investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for Petitions have been filed with the adjustment assistance under Title II, Secretary of Labor under section 221(a) chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and will further relate, as appropriate, to the are identified in the Appendix to this determination of the date on which total notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, or partial separations began or
VerDate 11
threatened to begin and the subdivision Interested persons are invited to Adjustment Assistance, Employment of the firm involved. submit written comments regarding the and Training Administration, U.S. The petitioners or any other persons subject matter of the investigations to Department of Labor, Room C–5311, 200 showing a substantial interest in the the Director, Division of Trade Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, subject matter of the investigations may Adjustment Assistance, at the address DC 20210. request a public hearing, provided such shown below, not later than December Signed at Washington, DC this 26th day of request is filed in writing with the 28, 2001. November, 2001. Director, Division of Trade Adjustment The petitions filed in this case are Edward A. Tomchick, Assistance, at the address shown below, available for inspection at the Office of Director, Division of Trade Adjustment not later than December 28, 2001. the Director, Division of Trade Assistance. APPENDIX [Petitions Instituted On 11/26/2001]
Date of pe- TA–W Subject firm (petitioners) Location tition Product(s)
40,366 ..... Mike Dent Enterprises (Co.) ...... Burns, OR ...... 10/31/2001 Harvested Lumber. 40,367 ..... B/E Aerospace, SPG (Co.) ...... Litchfield, CT ...... 11/05/2001 Airline Seats. 40,368 ..... SEH—America (Wkrs) ...... Vancouver, WA ...... 11/07/2001 Silicon Wafers. 40,369 ..... PSW Industries (Co.) ...... Michigan City, IN ...... 11/09/2001 Metal Stamping, Tool and Die Making. 40,370 ..... Valley Precision Tool (Co.) ...... Tower City, PA ...... 11/13/2001 Electronic Connector Assemblies. 40,371 ..... Regal Rugs, Inc. (Co.) ...... North Vernon, IN ...... 11/01/2001 Bath and Accent Rugs. 40,372 ..... Square D Co. (IBEW) ...... Middletown, OH ...... 11/15/2001 Switchgear Boxes. 40,373 ..... Siemens Energy and Auto. (Co.) ...... Osceoloa, IA ...... 11/09/2001 Electrical, Motor Controls and Parts. 40,374 ..... OSAN Manufacturing (UNITE) ...... Boyertown, PA ...... 11/16/2001 Men’s Pants. 40,375 ..... EGS Electrical (Co.) ...... Lake Geneva, WI ...... 08/30/2001 Industrial Transformers.
[FR Doc. 01–31136 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Department in the Finishing Division DEPARTMENT OF LABOR BILLING CODE 4510–30–M engaged in the production of sheets, pillowcases and comforters and related Employment and Training accessories. The workers employed in Administration DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the Finishing Apparel Department were denied eligibility because they did not [NAFTA–04812] Employment and Training Administration meet the group eligibility requirements Cemex Kosmos Cement Company, of the Trade Act. The company provides Pittsburgh Plant, Pittsburgh, PA; [TA–W–39,565A] new information indicating that the Notice of Affirmative Determination workers are not separately identifiable Thomaston Mills, Inc., Finishing Regarding Application for within the Finishing Division. Division, Thomaston, GA; Amended Reconsideration It is the intent of the Department to Certification Regarding Eligibility To By letter of July 20, 2001 the include ‘‘all workers’’ of Thomaston Apply for Worker Adjustment International Brotherhood of Boiler Mills, Inc., Finishing Division, Assistance Makers, Iron Ship Builders, Thomaston, Georgia adversely affected Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers In accordance with section 223 of the by increased imports. Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the requested administrative Department of Labor issued a Notice of Accordingly, the Department is reconsideration of the Department of Determination Regarding Eligibility to amending this certification Labor’s Notice of Negative Apply for Worker Adjustment determination to include all workers in Determination Regarding Eligibility to Assistance on November 15, 2001, the Finishing Division. Apply for NAFTA Transitional applicable to workers of Thomaston The amended notice applicable to Adjustment Assistance, applicable to Mills, Inc., Finishing Division, TA–W–39,565A is hereby issued as petition number NAFTA 04613. The Finishing Consumer Department, follows: denial notice was signed on June 26, Thomaston, Georgia engaged in the 2001 and published in the Federal production of sheets, pillowcases and All workers of Thomaston Mills, Inc., Register on July 11, 2001 (66 FR 36329). comforters and related accessories. All Finishing Division, Thomaston, Georgia who The union requested administrative workers of Thomaston Mills, Inc., became totally or partially separated from reconsideration based on the belief that Finishing Division, Finishing Apparel employment on after June 20, 2000, through Cemex (the acquiring company of the Department, Thomaston, Georgia were November 15, 2003, are eligible to apply for subject plant) replaced the subject denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of plants customer base with imported adjustment assistance. The notice was the Trade Act of 1974. cement products from Mexico. published in the Federal Register on Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of Conclusion November 30, 2001 (66 FR 59817). December, 2001. At the request of the company, the After careful review of the Department reviewed the certification Linda G. Poole, application, I conclude that the claim is for workers of the subject firm. Findings Certifying Officer, Division of Trade of sufficient weight to justify show that the Department limited its Adjustment Assistance. reconsideration of the Department of certification coverage to workers of the [FR Doc. 01–31134 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Labor’s prior decision. The application subject firms’s Finishing Consumer BILLING CODE 4510–30–M is, therefore, granted.
VerDate 11
Signed at Washington, DC this 3rd day of Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of published in the Federal Register on December 2001. November 2001. April 16, 2001 (66 FR 19522). Edward A. Tomchick, Linda G. Poole, At the request of the State agency, the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Department reviewed the certification Assistance. Adjustment Assistance. for workers of the subject firm. The [FR Doc. 01–31150 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 01–31142 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] workers are engaged in the production BILLING CODE 4510–30–M of medical catheters. New information BILLING CODE 4510–30–M shows that Ethicon, A Johnson and Johnson Co. is the parent firm of DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Gynecare, Menlo Park, California. Information also shows that workers Employment and Training separated from employment at the Employment and Training Administration Administration subject firm had their wages reported [NAFTA–5247] under a separate unemployment insurance (UI) tax account for Gynecare, [NAFTA–04830] Fedders Corporation, Columbia Ethicon, A Johnson and Johnson Co. Specialities, Inc., Columbia, Centis, Inc.; Formerly Known as 20th Menlo Park, California. Tennessee; Notice of Termination of Century Plastics; Brea, CA; Amended Accordingly, the Department is Investigation Certification Regarding Eligibility To amending the certification to properly Apply for NAFTA–Transitional Pursuant to Title V of the North reflect this matter. Adjustment Assistance American Free Trade Agreement The intent of the Department’s Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103–182) certification is to include all workers of In accordance with section 250(A), concerning transitional adjustment Gynecare, Menlo Park, California who subchapter D, chapter 2, Title II, of the assistance, hereinafter called (NAFTA– were adversely affected by a shift of Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), the TAA), and in accordance with section production of medical catheters to Department of Labor issued a 250(a), subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, Mexico. Certification for NAFTA Transitional of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended The amended notice applicable to Adjustment Assistance on August 16, (19 U.S.C. 2273), an investigation was NAFTA–04403 is hereby issued as 2001, applicable to workers of Centis, initiated on August 20, 2001, in follows: Inc., Brea, California. The notice was response to a petition filed on behalf of All workers of Gynecare, Ethicon, A published in the Federal Register on workers at Fedders Corporation, Johnson and Johnson Co., Menlo Park, August 23, 2001 (66 FR 44380). Columbia Specialities, Inc., Columbia, California who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after At the request of the State agency, the Tennessee. The petitioners requested that the December 21, 1999, through March 21, 2003, Department reviewed the certification are eligible to apply for NAFTA–TAA under for workers of the subject firm. The petition for NAFTA–TAA be Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974. workers are engaged in the production withdrawn. Consequently, further of thin sheer transparent plastic page investigation in this case would serve Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of no purpose, and the investigation has November 2001. protectors. The subject firm originally been terminated. named 20th Century Plastics was Linda G. Poole, renamed Centis, Inc. in January 2000. Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of Certifying Officer, Division of Trade The State agency reports that some November 2001. Adjustment Assistance. workers wages at the subject firm are Linda G. Poole, [FR Doc. 01–31139 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] being reported under the Certifying Officer, Division of Trade BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax Adjustment Assistance. account for Centis, Inc., formerly known [FR Doc. 01–31144 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR as 20th Century Plastics, Brea, BILLING CODE 4510–30–M California. Employment and Training Accordingly, the Department is DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Administration amending the certification to properly [NAFTA–04888] reflect this matter. Employment and Training The intent of the Department’s Administration Imperial Home Decor Group, certification is to include all workers of [NAFTA–04403] Plattsburgh, NY; Notice of Negative Centis, Inc., who were adversely Determination Regarding Application affected by a shift in the production of Gynecare, Ethicon, A Johnson and for Reconsideration thin sheer transparent plastic page Johnson Co.; Menlo Park, CA; protectors to Mexico. Amended Certification Regarding By application dated June 22, 2001, the petitioner requested administrative The amended notice applicable to Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA- Transitional Adjustment Assistance reconsideration of the Department’s NAFTA–04830 is hereby issued as negative determination regarding follows: In accordance with section 250(A), eligibility to apply for North American All workers of Centis, Inc., formerly known subchapter D, chapter 2, Title II, of the Free Trade Agreement-eligibility as 20th Century Plastics, Brea, California who Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), the Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA–TAA), became totally or partially separated from Department of Labor issued a applicable to workers and former employment on or after April 24, 2000, Certification for NAFTA Transitional workers of the subject firm. The denial through August 16, 2003, are eligible to apply Adjustment Assistance on March 21, notice was signed on June 4, 2001, and for NAFTA–TAA under Section 250 of the 2001, applicable to workers of Gynecare, was published in the Federal Register Trade Act of 1974. Melo Park, California. The notice was on June 27, 2001 (66 FR 34257).
VerDate 11
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) certification or previous plant Free Trade Agreement-Transitional reconsideration may be granted under production that was done before the Adjustment Assistance Implementation the following circumstances: relevant period of the investigation. Act (Pub. L. 103–182), hereinafter called (1) If it appears on the basis of facts Workers of Imperial Home Decor (NAFTA–TAA), have been filed with not previously considered that the Group, Plattsburgh, New York may be State Governors under section 250(b)(1) determination complained of was certified only if their separation was of subchapter D, chapter 2, Title II, of erroneous; caused importantly by a reduced the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, are (2) if it appears that the determination demand for their services from a parent identified in the Appendix to this complained of was based on a mistake firm, a firm otherwise related to the Notice. Upon notice from a Governor in the determination of facts not subject firm by ownership, or a firm that a NAFTA–TAA petition has been previously considered; or related by control. Additionally, the received, the Director of the Division of (3) if in the opinion of the Certifying reduction in demand for services must Trade Adjustment Assistance (DTAA), Officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of originate at a production facility whose Employment and Training the law justified reconsideration of the workers independently meet the Administration (ETA), Department of decision. statutory criteria for certification and Labor (DOL), announces the filing of the The denial of NAFTA–TAA for the reduction must directly relate to the petition and takes action pursuant to workers providing warehousing, product impacted by imports. These paragraphs (c) and (e) of section 250 of maintenance and security at Imperial conditions have not been met for the Trade Act. Home Decor Group, Plattsburgh, New workers at the subject firm. The purpose of the Governor’s actions York, as based on the finding that the Further, any shift in warehousing and the Labor Department’s workers do not produce an article as functions to Canada as depicted by the investigations are to determine whether required for certification under section petitioner, does not meet the eligibility the workers separated from employment 250(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as requirements for the same reason as on or after December 8, 1993 (date of amended. discussed above. enactment of Pub. L. 103–182) are The petitioner claims that the workers Conclusion eligible to apply for NAFTA–TAA under engaged in the warehousing, Subchapter D of the Trade Act because After review of the application and maintenance and security at the subject of increased imports from or the shift in investigative findings, I conclude that plant should be certified for eligibility production to Mexico or Canada. under NAFTA–TAA since the plant was there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law or of the The petitioners or any other persons under an existing certification (NAFTA– showing a substantial interest in the 02904), which expired on March 22, facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department of subject matter of the investigations may 2001. The petitioner further states that request a public hearing with the warehouse functions were transferred to Labor’s prior decisions. Accordingly, the application is denied. Director of DTAA at the U.S. Canada. Department of Labor (DOL) in Review of the investigation shows Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of Washington, DC provided such request November, 2001. that no production has been performed if filed in writing with the Director of at the subject firm since November Edward A. Tomchick, DTAA not later than December 28, 2001. 1998. They were not in direct support Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Also, interested persons are invited to of a certified facility producing a Assistance. submit written comments regarding the product during the relevant period. All [FR Doc. 01–31140 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] subject matter of the petitions to the workers terminated during the NAFTA– BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Director of DTAA at the address shown TAA certification (NAFTA–02904) below not later than December 28, 2001. period are eligible to apply for benefits. Since no production at the subject DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Petitions filed with the Governors are firm has been performed after November available for inspection at the Office of 1998, the workers terminated after Employment and Training the Director, DTAA, ETA, DOL, Room March 22, 2001 cannot be considered Administration C–5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. engaged in production as required in Investigations Regarding Certifications Section 250(a) of the Trade Act, as of Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of December, 2001. amended. The workers are considered Transitional Adjustment Assistance for eligibility based on what they did Edward A. Tomchick, during the relevant period and cannot Petitions for transitional adjustment Director, Division of Trade Adjustment be connected to the previous assistance under the North American Assistance. APPENDIX
Date re- ceived at Subject firm Location Governor’s Petition No. Articles produced office
Indiana Knitwear—Willacy Apparel (Co.) Lyford, TX ...... 11/13/2001 NAFTA–5,539 Sportswear apparel. Plaid Clothing (UNITE) ...... Erlander, KY ...... 10/30/2001 NAFTA–5,540 Men’s tailored clothing. Donaldson Aercology (Co.) ...... Old Saybrook, CT ...... 11/13/2001 NAFTA–55,541 Air filtration equipment. Lea Wayne Knitting Mills (Co.) ...... Morristown, TN ...... 11/10/2001 NAFTA–5,542 Socks and hosiery. Nokia Networks (Wkrs) ...... Ft. Worth, TX ...... 11/19/2001 NAFTA–5,543 Prototype and prezero modules. Powerbrace Corporation (Wkrs) ...... Kenosha, WI ...... 11/19/2001 NAFTA–5,544 Railcar gates and lock rods. Daniel Woodhead (Co.) ...... Northbrook, IL ...... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,545 Electrical lighting products. Storm Copper Components (Co.) ...... Decatur, TN ...... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,546 Wire harnesses. Marconi (Wkrs) ...... Milwaukee, WI ...... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,547 Telecommunication cabinets.
VerDate 11
APPENDIX—Continued
Date re- ceived at Subject firm Location Governor’s Petition No. Articles produced office
Clebert’s Hosiery Mill (Co.) ...... Connelly Springs, NC ..... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,548 Knit, seam and inspect hosiery. Western Log Homes (Co.) ...... Chiloquin, OR ...... 11/05/2001 NAFTA–5,549 Rails, vineyard posts, retaining walls. DataMark (Wkrs) ...... El Paso, TX ...... 11/15/2001 NAFTA–5,550 Data entries. Foredtert Malting (UAW) ...... Milwaukee, WI ...... 11/15/2001 NAFTA–5,551 Malt for breweries. Segro Colonial Abrasives (Co.) ...... Aberdeen, NC ...... 11/14/2001 NAFTA–5,552 Abrasives. Gulford Mills (UNITE) ...... Pine Grove, PA ...... 11/13/2001 NAFTA–5,553 Apparel. PSW Industries—Tempel Steel (Co.) ..... Michigan City, IN ...... 11/13/2001 NAFTA–5,554 Steel laminations. Gillette Company (IBT) ...... Iowa City, IA ...... 11/13/2001 NAFTA–5,555 Toothbrushes etcs. Alfa Laval—Tri Clover (Wkrs) ...... Pleasant Prairie, WI ...... 11/19/2001 NAFTA–5,556 Piping systems. Teleflex Automotive (Wkrs) ...... Waterbury, CT ...... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,557 Automotive cables. MoCaro Dyeing and Finishing (Co.) ...... Statesville, NC ...... 11/19/2001 NAFTA–5,558 T-shirts and sweatshirts. Mike Dent Enterprises (Co.) ...... Barns, OR ...... 11/09/2001 NAFTA–5,559 Logging. Fine Tech—Daeduck International (Co.) Durham, NC ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,560 Printed circuit boards. OSAN (UNITE) ...... Boxertown, PA ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,561 Men’s pants. Kellogg Crankshaft (Wkrs) ...... Jackson, MI ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,562 Crankshafts. CNB International (Wkrs) ...... Hastings, MI ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,563 Precision repair parts. Como Products (UAW) ...... Columbus, IN ...... 11/16/2001 NAFTA–5,564 Television cabinets. R. G. Barry, Texas LP (Co.) ...... San Angelo, TX ...... 11/21/2001 NAFTA–5,565 House slipper shoe sole. Lucent Technologies (IBEW) ...... Columbus, OH ...... 10/15/2001 NAFTA–5,566 Elecom equipment. Akers National Roll (Co.) ...... Hyde Park, PA ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,567 Steel rolls. Dimension Carbide (Co.) ...... Guys Mill, PA ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,568 Grinding of carbide dies and punches. NACCO Materials Handling (Co.) ...... Greenville, NC ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,569 Lower weldments. Antec Corporation (Co.) ...... El Paso, TX ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,570 Plastic molded parts. Wesley Industries (Co.) ...... Bloomfield Hills, MI ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,571 Heads, rotors and bearing caps. Regal Manufacturing (Wkrs) ...... Hickory, NC ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,572 Yarn. Metalloy (Wkrs) ...... Hudson, MI ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,573 Freightliner. VF Corporation (Wkrs) ...... Lebanon, MO ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,574 Jeans. Saturn Electronics and Engineering Auburn Hills, MI ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,575 Circuit boards. (Wkrs). Von Hoffman Press (Wkrs) ...... Owensville, MO ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,576 Textbooks, college and children’s books. ESP—Jocessee Trading (Co.) ...... Easley, SC ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,577 Comforters, sheets, pillows etc. Detroit Tool and Engineering (Wkrs) ...... Lebanon, MO ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,578 Household appliances. A. S. Haight (UNITE) ...... Cartersville, GA ...... 11/27/2001 NAFTA–5,579 Screen printing cloth. InterMetro Industries (Co.) ...... Douglas, GA ...... 11/26/2001 NAFTA–5,580 Wire steel shelving. Galey and Land (G and L Service) Eagle Pass, TX ...... 12/03/2001 NAFTA–5,581 Men’s and women’s pants. (Wkrs). Kentucky Textiles (Wkrs) ...... Paris, KY ...... 11/20/2001 NAFTA–5,582 Swimsuits. Weavexx (Wkrs) ...... Greenville, TN ...... 11/27/2001 NAFTA–5,583 Paper machinebetting. Carrier Corporation (Wkrs) ...... Conway, AR ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,584 Ice cream and frozen novelty cases. VF Jeanswear (Wkrs) ...... Andrew, NC ...... 11/27/2001 NAFTA–5,585 Denim jeans. Celectica Corporation (Co.) ...... Milwaukie, OR ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,586 Design power supplies. Glenayre Electronics (Wkrs) ...... Quincy, IL ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,587 Power amplifiers. TRW Automotive Breaking Systems Milford, MI ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,588 Valves. (UAW). GDX Automotive—Gencorp (USWA) ..... Marion, IN ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,589 Bubber weather seals. Hoskins Manufacturing (Co.) ...... Mio, MI ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,590 Thermal couple, resistance wire etc. Hoskins Thermal Systems (Co.) ...... Lewiston, MI ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,591 Thermal couple and resistance wire etc. VF Jeanswear (Co.) ...... Jackson, TN ...... 11/28/2001 NAFTA–5,592 Jeans. Boeing Defence and Space (Wkrs) ...... Oak Ridge, TN ...... 11/30/2001 NAFTA–5,593 Boeing airplane parts. Square D (Wkrs) ...... Middletown, OH ...... 11/27/2001 NAFTA–5,594 Heavy duty safety switch. Tenneco Automotive (Co.) ...... Ligonier, IN ...... 11/29/2001 NAFTA–5,595 Car exhaust systems. Teva Pharmaceuticals (Co.) ...... Elmwood Park, NJ ...... 11/18/2001 NAFTA–5,596 Antibiotics. Spicer Driveshaft (Co.) ...... Lima, OH ...... 11/30/2001 NAFTA–5,597 Companion flanges. Kraft Foods (Co.) ...... Minneapolis, MN ...... 11/21/2001 NAFTA–5,598 Hot cereals. Artex International (Co.) ...... Boiling Springs, NC ...... 12/04/2001 NAFTA–5,599 Linen napkins and table skiring. DK Mold Engineering (Co.) ...... Wyoming, MI ...... 10/21/2001 NAFTA–5,600 Die for plastic injection molds.
VerDate 11
[FR Doc. 01–31135 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of produced increased significantly during BILLING CODE 4510–30–M November, 2001. the relevant period. The industry data Linda G. Poole, also depicts a meaningful increase in Certifying Officer, Division of Trade the import to shipment ratio of these DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Adjustment Assistance. products during the relevant period. [FR Doc. 01–31132 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Employment and Training However, aggregate U.S. imports from BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Administration Canada and/or Mexico of selected fabrics like and directly competitive [NAFTA–04775] with what the subject plant produced DEPARTMENT OF LABOR remained relatively stable during the Jonathan Manufacturing d/b/a/ Jonathan Engineered Solutions Employment and Training relevant period. The imports from Fullerton, CA; Amended Certification Administration Canada and/or Mexico are relatively low in relation to total aggregate U.S. Regarding Eligibility To Apply for [TA–W–39,632 & NAFTA–5059, et al.] NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment imports. Assistance JPS Apparel Fabrics Corporation Conclusion Greenville, SC, et al.; Notice of In accordance with section 250(A), Determination on Reconsideration After careful review of the additional subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the facts obtained on reconsideration, I Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), the On October 10, 2001, the Department conclude that increased imports of Department of labor issued a issued a Notice of Affirmative articles like or directly competitive with Certification for NAFTA Transitional Determination Regarding Application spun and filament greige woven apparel Adjustment Assistance on May 8, 2001, for Reconsideration for TAA and fabrics, contributed importantly to the applicable to workers of Jonathan NAFTA–TAA applicable to workers and Engineered Solutions, Fullerton, former workers of the subject firm. The decline in sales or production and to the California. The notice was published in notice was published in the Federal total or partial separation of workers of the Federal Registeron May 23, 2001 (66 Register on October 30, 2001 (66 FR JPS Apparel Corporation, Greenville, FR 28554). 54785). South Carolina (TA–W–39,632), South At the request of the State agency, the The initial TAA and NAFTA–TAA Boston, Virginia (TA–W–39,632A), New Department reviewed the certification petition investigations for workers at York, New York (TA–W–39,632B), and for workers of the subject firm. The JPS Apparel Corporation, Greenville, Laurens, South Carolina (TA–W– workers are engaged in the activities South Carolina (TA–W–39,632 & 39,632C). In accordance with the related to the production of aluminum NAFTA–5059), South Boston, Virginia provisions of the Act, I make the slides (assembly and fabrication). The (TA–W–39,632A & NAFTA–5059A), following revised determination: workers are separately identifiable from New York, New York (TA–W–39,632B & All workers of JPS Apparel Corporation, workers producing steel slides at the NAFTA–5059B), and Laurens, South Greenville, South Carolina (TA–W–39,632), subject plant. Carolina (TA–W–39,632C & NAFTA– South Boston, Virginia (TA–W–39,632A), New information provided by the 5059C) were denied based on the New York, New York (TA–W–39,632B), and State shows that Jonathan finding that the subject firm and Laurens, South Carolina (TA–W–39,632C) Manufacturing is the parent firm of customers of the subject firm did not who became totally or partially separated Jonathan Engineered Solutions, increase their import (including from from employment on or after July 16, 2000, Fullerton, California. Information also Canada and Mexico) purchases of spun through two years from the date of this shows that some of the claimants’ wages filament greige woven apparel fabrics issuance, are eligible to apply for adjustment are reported under the Unemployment during the relevant period. assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act Insurance (UI) tax account for Jonathan The company supplied an additional of 1974; and Manufacturing, d/b/a Jonathan list of customers that they believed were Engineered Solutions, Fullerton importing spun filament greige woven After reconsideration, I affirm the California. apparel fabrics. original notice of negative Accordingly, the Department is On reconsideration, the Department determination of eligibility to apply for amending the certification to properly conducted a survey of JPS Apparel NAFTA–TAA under Section 250 of the reflect this matter. Corporation’s additional customers Trade Act of 1974 for workers and The intent of the Department’s (accounting for a meaningful portion of former workers of JPS Apparel certification is to include all workers of the subject firms customer base) Corporation, Greenville, South Carolina Jonathan Engineered Solutions who regarding their purchases of spun (NAFTA–5059), South Boston, Virginia were adversely affected by a shift in the filament greige woven apparel fabrics production of aluminum slides to (NAFTA–5059A), New York, New York during 1999, 2000 and January through (NAFTA–5059B), and Laurens, South Mexico. July 2001. The survey revealed that Carolina (NAFTA–5059C). The amended notice applicable to some respondents increased their NAFTA–04775 is hereby issued as reliance on imported (no meaningful Signed in Washington, DC this 30th day of follows: imports from Canada or Mexico) spun November 2001. All workers of Jonathan Manufacturing, D/ filament greige woven apparel fabrics, Edward A. Tomchick, B/A Jonathan Engineered Solutions, contributing to the layoffs at the subject Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Fullerton, California, engaged in employment firm during the relevant period. Assistance. related to the production of aluminum slides On reconsideration the Department [FR Doc. 01–31148 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] (fabrication and assembly) who became further examined U.S. import data that totally or partially separated from BILLING CODE 4510–30–M employment on or after March 27, 2000, was not available during the initial through May 8, 2003, are eligible to apply for investigation. The import data shows NAFTA–TAA under Section 250 of the Trade that selected fabrics like or directly Act of 1974. competitive with what the subject plant
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR apparel were denied eligibility to apply Arts on Radio & Television (ARTV): for NAFTA Transitional Adjustment January 8–10, 2002, Room 716. A Employment and Training Assistance. The notice was published in portion of this meeting, from 9 a.m. to Administration the Federal Register on November 6, 10 a.m. on January 10th, will be open [NAFTA–5412] 2001 (66 FR 56126). to the public for policy discussion. The At the request of the company, the remaining portions of this meeting, from Laser Tool, Saegertown, PA; Notice of Department reviewed the certification 9 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on January 8th and Termination of Investigation for workers of the subject firm. Findings 9th, and from 10 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on show that the Department limited its January 10th, will be closed. Pursuant to Title V of the North certification coverage to workers of the American Free Trade Agreement subject firms’ Finishing Consumer Infrastructure Initiative: January 9–10, Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103–1 Department in the Finishing Division 2002, Room 714. A portion of this concerning transitional adjustment engaged in the production of sheets, meeting, from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. on assistance, hereinafter called NAFTA– pillowcases and comforters and related January 10th, will be open to the public TAA and in accordance with section accessories. The workers employed in for policy discussion. The remaining 250(a), subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, the Finishing Apparel Department were portions of this meeting, from 9 a.m. to of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended denied eligibility because they did not 6:30 p.m. on January 9th, and from 9 (19 U.S.C. 2331), an investigation was meet the group eligibility requirements a.m. to 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. initiated on October 12, 2001, in of the Trade Act. The company provides on January 10th, will be closed. response to a petition filed by the new information indicating that the The closed portions of these meetings company on behalf of workers at Laser workers are not separately identifiable Tool, Saegertown, Pennsylvania. are for the purpose of Panel review, within the Finishing Division. discussion, evaluation, and Workers produce plastic injection molds It is the intent of the Department to and manifolds. include ‘‘all workers’’ of Thomaston recommendation on applications for The petitioner has requested that the Mills, Inc., Finishing Division, financial assistance under the National petition be withdrawn. Consequently, Thomaston, Georgia adversely affected Foundation on the Arts and the further investigation in this case would by increased imports from Canada and Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, serve no purpose, and the investigation Mexico. including information given in has been terminated. Accordingly, the Department is confidence to the agency by grant Signed at Washington, DC this 26th day of amending the certification applicants. In accordance with the November, 2001. determination to include all workers in determination of the Chairman of May Linda G. Poole, the Finishing Division. 22, 2001, these sessions will be closed Certifying Officer, Division of Trade The amended notice applicable to to the public pursuant to (c)(4)(6) and Adjustment Assistance. NAFTA–05014A is hereby issued as (9)(B) of section 552b of Title 5, United [FR Doc. 01–31143 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] follows: States Code. BILLING CODE 4510–30–M All workers of Thomaston Mills, Inc., Any person may observe meetings, or Finishing Division, Thomaston, Georgia who portions thereof, of advisory panels that became totally or partially separated from DEPARTMENT OF LABOR employment on or after June 16, 2000, are open to the public, and, if time through October 25, 2003, are eligible to allows, may be permitted to participate Employment and Training apply for NAFTA–TAA under Section 250 of in the panel’s discussions at the Administration the Trade Act of 1974. discretion of the panel chairman and with the approval of the full-time [NAFTA–05014A] Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of December 2001. Federal employee in attendance. Thomaston Mills, Inc., Finishing Edward A. Tomchick, If you need special accommodations Division, Thomaston, GA, Amended Director, Division of Trade Adjustment due to a disability, please contact the Certification Regarding Eligibility To Assistance. Office of AccessAbility, National Apply for NAFTA-Transitional [FR Doc. 01–31133 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Adjustment Assistance BILLING CODE 4510–30–M Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., In accordance with section 250(A), Washington, DC 20506, 202/682–5532, subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the TDY–TDD 202/682–5496, at least seven Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), the NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE (7) days prior to the meeting. ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Department of Labor issued a Notice of Further information with reference to Determination Regarding Eligibility to National Endowment for the Arts; this meeting can be obtained from Ms. Apply for NAFTA Transitional Leadership Initiatives Advisory Panel Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of Adjustment Assistance on October 25, Guidelines & Panel Operations, National 2001, applicable to workers of Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Endowment for the Arts, Washington, Thomaston Mills, Inc., Finishing Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. DC, 20506, or call 202/682–5691. Division, Finishing Consumer L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby Department, Thomaston, Georgia given that two meetings of the Dated: December 12, 2001. engaged in the production of sheets, Leadership Initiatives Advisory Panel to Kathy Plowitz-Worden, pillowcases and comforters and related the National Council on the Arts (Folk Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations, accessories. All workers of Thomaston & Traditional Arts’ Infrastructure National Endowment for the Arts. Mills, Inc., Finishing Division, Initiative and Media Arts’ Arts on Radio [FR Doc. 01–31050 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Finishing Apparel Department, & Television categories) will be held at BILLING CODE 7537–01–P Thomaston, Georgia engaged in the the Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 production of textiles for home Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., furnishings and piece dyed goods of Washington, DC, 20506 as follows:
VerDate 11
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE National Indian Gaming Commission the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES has adopted final annual fee rates of and 2, located in Montgomery County, 0.00% for tier 1 and 0.075% (.00075) for Pennsylvania. Therefore, as required by National Endowment for the Arts; tier 2 for calendar year 2001. These rates 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this Partnerships Advisory Panel shall apply to all assessable gross environmental assessment and finding Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the revenues from each gaming operation of no significant impact. under the jurisdiction of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. Environmental Assessment L. 92–463), as amended, notice is hereby Commission. Identification of the Proposed Action given that a meeting of the Partnerships FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Advisory Panel (State Partnership Bobby Gordon, National Indian Gaming The proposed action would allow a Agreements), to the National Council on Commission, 1441 L Street, NW., Suite one-time exemption from the the Arts will be held on January 17–18, 9100, Washington, DC 20005; telephone requirements of 10 CFR part 50, 2002. The panel will meet from 9:00 202/632–7003; fax 202/632–7066 (these Appendix E, Items IV.F.2.b and c, a.m. to 5:30 p.m on January 17 and from are not toll-free numbers). regarding conduct of a full-participation 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on January 18 in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The exercise of the onsite and offsite Room 716 at the Nancy Hanks Center, Indian Gaming Regulatory Act emergency plan every 2 years. Under 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., established the National Indian Gaming the proposed exemption, the licensee Washington, DC, 20506. Commission which is charged with, would reschedule the exercise originally This meeting will be open to the among other things, regulating gaming scheduled for November 1, 2001, and public on a space available basis. Topics on Indian lands. complete the exercise requirements by will include review of the State The regulations of the Commission December 31, 2002. Partnership Agreement and Regional (25 CFR part 514), as amended, provide The proposed action is in accordance Partnership Agreement applications, for a system of fee assessment and with the licensee’s application for an review of proposals for Challenge payment that is self-administered by exemption dated October 16, 2001. America Partnership funds, and gaming operations. Pursuant to those The Need for the Proposed Action discussion of guidelines and policy regulations, the Commission is required issues. to adopt and communicate assessment Currently under 10 CFR part 50, Any person may observe meetings, or rates; the gaming operations are Appendix E, Items IV.F.2. b and c, each portions thereof, of advisory panels required to apply those rates to their licensee at each site is required to which are open to the public, and, if revenues, compute the fees to be paid, conduct a full-participation exercise of time allows, may be permitted to report the revenues, and remit the fees its onsite and offsite emergency plans participate in the panel’s discussions at to the Commission on a quarterly basis. every 2 years. Federal agencies, such as the discretion of the panel chairman and The regulations of the Commission the Federal Emergency Management with the approval of the full-time and the preliminary annual rate being Agency, observe these exercises and Federal employee in attendance. adopted today are effective for calendar evaluate the performance of the If you need special accommodations year 2001. Therefore, all gaming licensee, State, and local authorities due to a disability, please contact the operations within the jurisdiction of the having a role under the emergency plan. Office of AccessAbility, National Commission are required to self- The licensee had initially planned to Endowment for the Arts, 1100 administer the provisions of these conduct an exercise of its offsite Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., regulations and report and pay any fees emergency plan on November 1, 2001, Washington, DC 20506, 202/682–5532, that are due to the Commission by which was within the required 2-year TDY–TDD 202/682–5496, at least seven December 31, 2001. interval. However, due to the ongoing (7) days prior to the meeting. national security threat in the United Further information with reference to Montie R. Deer, States, and the response, recovery, and this meeting can be obtained from Ms. Chairman, National Indian Gaming other offsite agency activities associated Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of Commission. with the September 11, 2001, terrorist Guidelines & Panel Operations, National [FR Doc. 01–31090 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] attacks, the licensee has decided to Endowment for the Arts, Washington, BILLING CODE 7565–01–M postpone the exercise. The licensee does DC, 20506, or call 202/682–5691. not plan to conduct the full- Dated: December 12, 2001. participation exercise until after the 2- Kathy Plowitz-Worden, NUCLEAR REGULATORY year interval has expired. COMMISSION Panel Coordinator, Panel Operations, Environmental Impacts of the Proposed National Endowment for the Arts. [Docket Nos. 50–352 and 50–353] Action [FR Doc. 01–31051 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] The NRC has completed its evaluation BILLING CODE 7537–01–P Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 of the proposed action and concludes and 2; Environmental Assessment and that the proposed action involves an Finding of No Significant Impact administrative activity unrelated to NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING plant operations. COMMISSION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory The proposed action will not Fee Rates Commission (NRC) is considering significantly increase the probability or issuance of an exemption from Title 10 consequences of accidents, no changes AGENCY: National Indian Gaming of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 are being made in the types of any Commission. CFR), part 50, Appendix E, Items IV.F.2. effluents that may be released offsite, ACTION: Notice. b and c, for Facility Operating License and there is no significant increase in Nos. NPF–39 and NPF–85, issued to occupational or public radiation SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, Exelon Generation Company, LLC exposure. Therefore, there are no pursuant to 25 CFR 514.1(a)(3), that the (Exelon, the licensee), for operation of significant radiological environmental
VerDate 11
impacts associated with the proposed ADAMS Public Library component on receipt and processing of alternate feed action. the NRC web site, http://www.nrc.gov material, from the Molycorp facility With regard to potential (the Electronic Reading Room). Persons located in Mountain Pass, California, at nonradiological impacts, the proposed who do not have access to ADAMS or the White Mesa uranium mill, located action does not have a potential to affect who encounter problems in accessing near Blanding, Utah.’’ Also, on page any historic sites. It does not affect the documents located in ADAMS, 64065 in the second column, in the fifth nonradiological plant effluents and has should contact the NRC PDR Reference complete paragraph the text is changed no other environmental impact. staff by telephone at 1–800–397–4209, from ‘‘The NRC staff has prepared an Therefore, there are no significant or 301–415–4737, or by e-mail at Environmental Assessment for the nonradiological environmental impacts [email protected]. proposed reclamation plan for NRC associated with the proposed action. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day Source Material License SUA–1358,’’ to Accordingly, the NRC concludes that of December 2001. read, ‘‘The NRC staff has prepared an there are no significant environmental For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Environmental Assessment to assess the impacts associated with the proposed Christopher Gratton, potential environmental impacts of action. Sr. Project Manager, Section 2, Project allowing for the receipt and processing Alternatives to the Proposed Action Directorate 1, Division of Licensing Project of alternate feed material, from the Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Molycorp facility located in Mountain As an alternative to the proposed Regulation. Pass, California, for NRC Source action, the staff considered denial of the [FR Doc. 01–31157 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Material License SUA–1358.’’ proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ BILLING CODE 7590–01–P alternative). Denial of the application Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day would result in no change in current of December, 2001. Melvyn N. Leach, environmental impacts. The NUCLEAR REGULATORY environmental impacts of the proposed COMMISSION Chief, Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch, Division action and the alternative action are of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office similar. International Uranium (USA) of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. Corporation; Notice or Consideration [FR Doc. 01–31156 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Alternative Use of Resources of Issuance of Amendments to Facility BILLING CODE 7590–01–P This action does not involve the use Operation Licenses, ProposedNo of any different resource than those Significant Hazards Consideration previously considered in the Final Determination, Opportunity for a Environmental Statement for the Hearing; Correction POSTAL SERVICE Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, dated April 1984. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Request for Comments on an Outline Commission. for Discussion: Concepts for Postal Agencies and Persons Consulted ACTION: Notice of issuance; correction. Transformation On December 6, 2001, the staff SUMMARY: This document corrects a contacted the Pennsylvania State AGENCY: Postal Service. official, Dennis Dyckman of the notice appearing in the Federal Register ACTION: Extension of comment period. Pennsylvania Department of on December 11, 2001 (66 FR 64064), Environment and Natural Resources, that considers issuance of notice of SUMMARY: regarding the environmental impact of opportunity for hearing issued to the The Postal Service published the proposed action. The State official International Uranium (USA) a notice with request for public had no comments. In addition, the Corporation. This action is necessary to comment in the Federal Register (66 FR licensee notified the Federal Emergency correct an erroneous text. 51480–51481) on October 9, 2001. The Management Agency and the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. document on which comments are Pennsylvania Emergency Management William von Till, Fuel Cycle Licensing requested is available on the Postal Agency, who indicated support for Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety Service’s public Web site at rescheduling the exercise. and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear www.usps.com/strategicdirection or at Material Safety and Safeguards, www.usps.com keyword: Finding of No Significant Impact telephone (301) 415–6251. transformation. Comments were due On the basis of the environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On page November 1, 2001. The comment period assessment, the NRC concludes that the 64064, in the third column, in the first is hereby extended until January 31, proposed action will not have a complete paragraph, the text is changed 2002. significant effect on the quality of the from ‘‘The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory DATES: The Postal Service must receive Commission (NRC) proposes to accept human environment. Accordingly, the your comments on or before January 31, the license amendment for the NRC NRC has determined not to prepare an 2002. No additional extensions on the Materials License SUA–1358 to environmental impact statement for the comment period will be granted. proposed action. authorize the licensee, International Further details with respect to the Uranium (USA) Corporation (IUSA), to ADDRESSES: Those responding are proposed action can be found in the allow for the and reclamation of the encouraged to e-mail their comments to licensee’s letter dated October 16, 2001. White Mesa uranium mill, located near [email protected]. Those Documents may be examined, and/or Blanding, Utah,’’ to read, ‘‘The U.S. wishing to send written comments copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) should mail them to Julie S. Moore, Document Room (PDR), located at One proposes to accept the license Executive Program Director, Office of White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike amendment for the NRC Materials Transformation, Strategic Planning, (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. License SUA–1358 to authorize the Room 4011, United States Postal Service Publicly available records will be licensee, International Uranium (USA) Headquarters, 475 L’Enfant Plaza, SW., accessible electronically from the Corporation (IUSA), to allow for the Washington, DC 20260–1520.
VerDate 11
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Comments are invited on: (a) Whether person willing to act on behalf of the Van Coverden (202) 268–8130. the proposed information collection is beneficiary as a representative payee. necessary for the proper performance of The RRB is responsible for determining Stanley F. Mires, the functions of the agency, including if direct payment of the beneficiary or Chief Counsel, Legislative. whether the information has practical payment to a representative payee [FR Doc. 01–31167 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s would best serve the beneficary’s BILLING CODE 7710–12–P estimate of the burden of the collection interest. Inherent in the RRB’s of the information; (c) ways to enhance authorization to select a representative the quality, utility, and clarity of the payee is the responsibility to monitor information to be collected; and (d) the payee to assure that the beneficiary’s RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD ways to minimize the burden related to interests are protected. Triennially, the the collection of information on RRB utilizes Form G–99d, Parental Proposed Data Collection Available for respondents, including the use of Custody Report, to obtain information Public Comment and automated collection techniques or needed to verify that a parent-for-child Recommendations other forms of information technology. representative payee still has custody of Title and Purpose of information the child. One response is required from SUMMARY: In accordance with the collection: Representative Payee requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of Parental Custody Monitoring. each respondent. The RRB proposes the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Under Section 12(a) of the Railroad minor non-burden impacting editorial which provides opportunity for public Retirement Act (RRA), the Railroad changes to Form G–99d. comment on new or revised data Retirement Board (RRB) is authorized to Estimate of Annual Respondent Burden collection, the Railroad Retirement select, make payments to, and to Board will publish periodic summaries conduct transactions with, a The estimated annual respondent of proposed data collections. beneficiary’s relative or some other burden is as follows:
Annual Time Burden Form/Nos. responses (min) (hrs)
G–99d ...... 1,850 5 154
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To of the information; (c) ways to enhance (before any reduction for age or request more information or to obtain a the quality, utility, and clarity of the deduction for work) the employee copy of the information collection information to be collected; and (d) would receive if he or she would have justification, forms, and/or supporting ways to minimize the burden related to been entitled to a like benefit under the material, please call the RRB Clearance the collection of information on Social Security Act. The reduction for a Officer at (312) 751–3363. Comments respondents, including the use of non-covered service pension also regarding the information collection automated collection techniques or applies to a Tier I portion of employees should be addressed to Ronald J. other forms of information technology. under the RRA where the annuity or Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 Title and purpose of information non-covered service pension begins N. Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611– collection: Employee Non-Covered after 1985. Since the amount of a Tier 2092. Written comments should be Service Pension Questionnaire; OMB I benefit of a spouse is one-half of the received within 60 days of this notice. 3220–0154. employee’s Tier I, the spouse annuity is Section 215(a)(7) of the Social also affected by the employee’s non- Chuck Mierzwa, Security Act provides for a reduction in covered service pension reduction of his Clearance Officer, social security benefits based on or her Tier I benefit. [FR Doc. 01–31106 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] employment not covered under the The RRB utilizes Form G–209, BILLING CODE 7905–01–M Social Security Act or the Railroad Employee Non-covered Service Pension Retirement Act (RRA). This provision Questionnaire, to obtain needed applies a different social security benefit information from railroad retirement RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD formula to most workers who are first employee applicants or annuitants eligible after 1985 to both a pension Proposed Collection; Comment about the receipt of a pension based on based in whole or in part on non- Request employment not covered under the covered employment and a social Railroad Retirement Act or the Social SUMMARY: In accordance with the security retirement or disability benefit. Security Act. It is used as both a requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of There is a guarantee provision that supplement to the employee annuity the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 limits the reduction in the social application, and as an independent which provides opportunity for public security benefit to one-half of the questionnaire to be completed when an comment on new or revised data portion of the pension based on non- individual who is already receiving an collections, the Railroad Retirement covered employment after 1956. Section employee annuity, becomes entitled to a Board (RRB) will publish periodic 8011 of P.L. 100–647 changed the pension. One response is requested of summaries of proposed data collections. effective date of the onset from the first each respondent. Completion is Comments are invited on: (a) Whether month of eligibility to the first month of required to obtain or retain benefits. The the proposed information collection is concurrent entitlement to the non- RRB proposes no changes to Form G– necessary for the proper performance of covered service benefit and the RRA 209. the functions of the agency, including benefit. whether the information has practical Section 3(a)(1) of the RRA provides Estimate of Annual Respondent Burden utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s that the Tier I benefit of an employee The estimated annual respondent estimate of the burden of the collection annuity will be equal to the amount burden is as follows:
VerDate 11
Annual Time Burden Form Nos. responses (min) (hrs)
G–209 (partial questionnaire) ...... 100 1 2 G–209 (full questionnaire) ...... 400 8 53
Total ...... 500 55
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Percent telephone: (202) 205–7574, or at the e- request more information or to obtain a mail address, [email protected]. copy of the information collection Businesses and non-profit or- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SBA’s justification, forms, and/or supporting ganizations without credit New Markets Venture Capital (NMVC) material, please call the RRB Clearance available elsewhere ...... 4.000 Program (Program) is authorized by the Officer at (312) 751–3363. Comments Others (including non-profit organizations) with credit NMVC Program Act of 2000, 15 U.S.C. regarding the information collection available elsewhere ...... 6.375 689–689q. Information about the should be addressed to Ronald J. For Economic Injury: Program is available at http://www.sba/ Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 Businesses and small agricul- gov/INV. The implementing regulations N. Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611– tural cooperatives without for this Program were issued on May 23, 2092. Written comments should be credit available elsewhere 4.000 2001 (66 FR 28602). received within 60 days of this notice. Under these rules, SBA has the authority and discretion to determine a Chuck Mierzwa, The numbers assigned to this disaster for physical damage are 338611 for minimum dollar amount for draws Clearance Officer. Arkansas; 338711 for Mississippi; and against SBA’s Leverage commitments. [FR Doc. 01–31107 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 338811 for Tennessee. The numbers 13 CFR 108.1230(b). Leverage means BILLING CODE 7905–01–M assigned to this disaster for economic financial assistance provided to a injury are 9N8100 for Arkansas; 9N8200 NMVC Company by SBA through the for Mississippi; and 9N8300 for guaranty of a NMVC Company’s SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Tennessee. Debentures, and any other SBA financial assistance evidenced by a (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance [Declaration of Disaster #3386] Program Nos. 59002 and 59008) security of the NMVC Company. Pursuant to 13 CFR 108.1230(b), the State of Arkansas (And contiguous Dated: December 11, 2001. amount of a draw that a NMVC counties in Mississippi and Hector V. Barreto, Company may take against SBA’s Tennessee) Administrator. leverage commitment must be a [FR Doc. 01–31099 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] multiple of $5,000. Any minimum Crittenden and Desha Counties and BILLING CODE 8025–01–U dollar amount for draws determined in the contiguous counties of Arkansas, SBA’s discretion are published in Chicot, Cross, Drew, Lee, Lincoln, Notices in the Federal Register from Mississippi, Phillips, Poinsett and St. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION time to time. This is the first Notice SBA Francis Counties in the State of has issued establishing a minimum Arkansas; Bolivar, Coahoma, DeSoto New Markets Venture Capital dollar amount for draws. Under the and Tunica Counties in the State of Companies; Minimum Draw Under authority set forth in this Notice, Mississippi; and Shelby and Tipton SBA’s Leverage Commitment effective the date of publication of this Counties in the State of Tennessee Notice, and until further notice, the constitute a disaster area as a result of AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). minimum dollar amount of a draw is severe storms and flooding that $100,000. (For example, for each draw, occurred from November 27 through ACTION: Notice. a NMVC Company may request a draw November 30, 2001. Applications for in the amount of $100,000 or $105,000 loans for physical damage as a result of SUMMARY: This Notice provides a or $110,000, and so on up to the total this disaster may be filed until the close minimum dollar amount of $100,000 for amount of Leverage committed to but of business on February 11, 2002 and for draws against SBA leverage not yet drawn by that NMVC Company.) economic injury may be filed until the commitments to New Markets Venture close of business on September 11, 2002 Capital Companies under the New Program Authority: 15 U.S.C. §§ 689–689q. at the address listed below or other Markets Venture Capital Program. This Dated: December 11, 2001. locally announced locations: U.S. Small Notice will be effective until superceded Harry Haskins, Business Administration, Disaster Area by another Federal Register Notice. Acting Associate Administrator for Investment. 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., Suite DATES: This notice is effective December [FR Doc. 01–31100 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] 102, Ft. Worth, TX 76155. 18, 2001. The interest rates are: BILLING CODE 8025–01–U ADDRESSES: Austin J. Belton, Director, Percent Office of New Markets Venture Capital, Investment Division, U.S. Small SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION For Physical Damage: Business Administration, 409 Third Homeowners with credit Street, SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC National Small Business Development available elsewhere ...... 6.500 20416. Center Advisory Board; Public Meeting Homeowners without credit available elsewhere ...... 3.250 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The U.S. Small Business Businesses with credit avail- Peter C. Gibbs, Deputy Director, Office Administration National Small Business able elsewhere ...... 8.000 of New Markets Venture Capital, DevelopmentCenter Advisory Board
VerDate 11
will hold a public meeting on Sunday, DEPARTMENT OF STATE article that is not a weapon, January 13, 2002, from 11 am to 5 pm ammunition, or other equipment or [Public Notice 3854] CST, in the Executive Board Room at material that is designed to inflict the Doubletree Hotel located in Little Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; serious bodily harm or death (see, e.g. Rock, Arkansas. This meeting will be Export of Non-lethal Defense Articles 10 U.S.C. 2557). held to discuss such matters as may be to Indonesia Dated: November 30, 2001. presented by members, staff of the U.S. Lincoln P. Bloomfield, Jr., AGENCY: Department of State. Small Business Administration or others Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political- present. ACTION: Notice. Military Affairs, Department of State. Anyone wishing to make an oral SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that [FR Doc. 01–31170 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] presentation to the Board must contact requests for export and retransfer of BILLING CODE 4710–25–P EllenThrasher, in writing by letter or fax non-lethal defense articles and spare no later than January 2, 2002 in order parts to Indonesia pursuant to section to be included on the agenda. For 38 of the Arms Export Control Act will DEPARTMENT OF STATE further information, please write or call be considered on a case-by-case basis. [Public Notice 3853] Ellen Thrasher, Designated Federal EFFECTIVE DATE: September 19, 2001. Notice of Meeting of the Cultural Officer U.S. Small Business FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Property Advisory Committee Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Peter J. Berry, Chief, Arms Licensing Fourth Floor, Washington, DC 20416. Division, Office of Defense Trade AGENCY: Department of State. Telephone number (202) 205–6817, Controls, Bureau of Political-Military ACTION: Notice. FAX (202) 205–7727. Affairs, Department of State (202) 663– 2700. The Cultural Property Advisory Steve Tupper, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Committee will meet on Wednesday, Committee Management Officer. October 14, 1999, a Federal Register January 23, 2002, from approximately 9 [FR Doc. 01–31098 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] notice was published (64 FR 55805) that a.m. to 5 p.m., and on Thursday, BILLING CODE 8025–01–U suspended all licenses and approvals to January 24, from approximately 9 a.m. export or otherwise transfer defense to 2 p.m., at the Department of State, articles and defense services to Annex 44, Room 800–A, 301 4th St., SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Indonesia, except for certain exports SW., Washington, DC. During its related to commercial communication meeting the Committee will review a Connecticut District Advisory Council; satellites and Y2K compliance activities request from the Government of the Public Meeting that were not for the Indonesian Republic of Honduras to the military. The October 14, 1999 Federal Government of the United States of The U.S. Small Business Register notice set forth a policy of America. Concerned that its cultural Administration Connecticut District denial for new export requests except heritage is in jeopardy from pillage, the Advisory Council, located in the those that met the exception. Government of the Republic of geographical area of Hartford, A Federal Register notice was Honduras made this request under Connecticut will hold a public meeting published on January 25, 2001 (66 FR Article 9 of the 1970 UNESCO at 8:30 a.m., on Monday, January 14, 7836) that permitted review, on a case- Convention. 2002, Connecticut District Office, 330 by-case basis, of requests for the export The Committee’s responsibilities are Main Street, Hartford, Connecticut of C–130 spare parts to Indonesia, carried out in accordance with 06106, to discuss such matters as may including for the Government of provisions of the Convention on be presented. For further information, Indonesia. On March 22, 2001, a CulturalProperty Implementation Act write or call Marie Record, District Federal Register notice was published (19 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.). A copy of the Director, U.S. Small Business (66 FR 16085) that expanded the review, Act, a public summary of this request, Administration, 330 Main Street, on a case-by-case basis, of defense a bibliography of documents researched Hartford, Connecticut—(860) 240–4700. articles/defense services exported to by the Committee that are otherwise Indonesia for ultimate end-use by a available to the public, and related Anyone wishing to attend and make third-country. information may be found at: http:// an oral presentation to the Board must This Notice expands categories of exchanges.state.gov/education/culprop. contact Marie A. Record, no later than defense articles/defense services eligible During its meeting on January 23, the January 9, 2002 via E-mail or fax. Marie for consideration for export/transfer to Committee will hold an open session, A. Record, District Director, U.S. Small Indonesia, on a case-by-case basis, to 10:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m., to receive oral Business Administration, Connecticut include: (a) Non-lethal defense articles public comment on the Honduras District Office 330 Main Street, and spare parts; and (b) non-lethal, request. Persons wishing to attend this Hartford, CT 06106 (860) 240–4670 safety-of-use spare parts for lethal end- open session should notify the phone or (860) 240–4714 fax or E-mail items. An example of safety-of-use items CulturalProperty office at (202) 619– [email protected]. would be cartridge actuated devices, 6612 by Tuesday, January 15,2002, to arrange for admission, as seating is Steve Tupper, propellant actuated devices and technical manuals for military aircraft limited. Those who wish to make oral Committee Management Officer. for purposes of enhancing the safety of presentations should also request to be [FR Doc. 01–31097 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] the aircraft crew. For non-lethal defense scheduled, and submit a written text of BILLING CODE 8025–01–P end-items, no distinction will be made the oral comments by January 15 to between Indonesia’s existing and new allow time for distribution of them to inventory. Committee members prior to the For the purposes of this policy, meeting. Oral comments will be limited ‘‘nonlethal defense articles’’ means an to five minutes each to allow time for
VerDate 11
questions from members of the issues and problems involve users of Dated: December 10, 2001. Committee and must specifically information and communications Pamela M. Bates, address the determinations under services, providers of such services, Executive Secretary, Advisory Committee on section 303(a)(1) of the Convention on technology research and development, International Communications and Cultural PropertyImplementation Act, foreign industrial and regulatory policy, Information Policy, Department of State. 19 U.S.C. 2602, for which the the activities of international [FR Doc. 01–31027 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Committee must make findings. organizations with regard to BILLING CODE 4710–07–P Those determinations are: ‘‘(A) That communications and information, and the cultural patrimony of the State Party developing country interests. (Honduras) is in jeopardy from pillage David Gross, Deputy Assistant DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION of archaeological or ethnological Secretary and U.S. Coordinator for materials; (B) that the State Party has Office of the Secretary International Communications and taken measures consistent with the Convention to protect its cultural Information Policy, will attend the Privacy Act of 1974: System of patrimony; (C) that (i) the application of meeting together with others from the Records the import restrictions, if applied in Office of Communications AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT. concert with similar restrictions andInformation Policy at the implemented, or to be implemented Department of State. Items on the ACTION: Notice to amend a system of within a reasonable period of time, by agenda will include communications records. those nations * * * individually having policy issues, discussion regarding SUMMARY: DOT intends to amend a a significant import trade in such countries of particular interest to ACICIP, general discussion of the system of record under the Privacy Act material, would be of substantial benefit of 1974. in deterring a serious situation of bilateral foreign consultation process, pillage, and (ii) remedies less drastic and differences between the US and EU EFFECTIVE DATE: January 28, 2002. than the application of the restrictions approaches on internet service FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: * * * are not available; and (D) that the regulation. Mr. Gross also would like to Yvonne L. Coates, Department of application of import restrictions. is solicit ideas from ACICIP on methods to Transportation, Office of the Secretary, consistent with the general interest of improve communications between 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC the international community in the industry and the Department of State, as 20590, (202) 366–6964 (telephone), interchange of cultural property among well as on specific issues of interest (202) 366–7024 (fax), nations for scientific, cultural, and related to upcoming bilateral meetings [email protected] (Internet educational purposes * * *’’. The withArgentina, Brazil, the European address). Committee also invites written Commission, France, and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The comments and asks that they be UnitedKingdom, as well as potential Department of Transportation system of submitted by January 15. All written meetings elsewhere. records notice subject to the Privacy Act materials, including the written texts of This meeting will be held on of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, has oral statements, should be faxed to (202) Thursday, January 10, 2002, from 9:30 been published in the Federal Register 619–5177. a.m. to 12 p.m. in Room 1105 of the and is available from the above Other portions of the meeting on Main Building of the U.S. Department of mentioned address. January 23 and 24 will be closed State, located at 2201 ‘‘C’’ Street, NW., DOT/ALL 7 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) and Washington, DC 20520. 19 U.S.C. 2605(h). Members of the public may attend SYSTEM NAME: Dated: December 11, 2001. these meetings up to the seating Departmental Accounting and Patricia S. Harrison, capacity of the room. While the meeting Financial Information System (DAFIS) Assistant Secretary for Educational and is open to the public, admittance to the and Delphi Accounting System. Cultural Affairs, Department of State. Department of State building is only by SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: [FR Doc. 01–31028 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] means of a pre-arranged clearance list. BILLING CODE 4710–11–P In order to be placed on the pre- Unclassified, sensitive. clearance list, please provide your SYSTEM LOCATION: name, title, company, social security The system is located in Department DEPARTMENT OF STATE number, date of birth, and citizenship to of Transportation (DOT), DOT Pamela M. Bates at [Public Notice 3830] Accounting offices and selected
VerDate 11
Administration, FMCSA; the Bureau of agencies’’ as defined in the Fair Credit RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: Transportation Statistics, BTS; Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 168a(f)) or the Same as ‘‘Notification procedure.’’ Transportation Administrative Service Federal Claims Collection Act of 1982 CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: Center, TASC, and the Transportation (31 U.S.C. 3701(a)(3)). Security Administration, TSA. These Same as ‘‘Notification procedure.’’ POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, offices exercise systems and operational RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: control over applicable records within DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: Information is provided by the the system. The system software is STORAGE: employee directly or through the DOT centrally maintained by the FAA’s Mike Consolidated Uniform Payroll System. Monroney Aeronautical Center, Records are stored on magnetic tape, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Some magnetic disk, microforms, and in file EXEMPTION CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: centralized reporting functions are folders. Storage of file folders and None. performed at Oklahoma City. microforms is at the geographic locations of the servicing accounting OMB CONTROL NUMBER: CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE office. Magnetic tape and disk records Not applicable SYSTEM OF RECORDS: are maintained at the central Dated: December 7, 2001. The systems cover: All employees of maintenance site in Oklahoma City. Yvonne L. Coates, DOT, and only of DOT, which includes FAA, USCG, NHTSA, FHWA, OST, RETRIEVABILITY: Privacy Act Coordinator. RSPA, FRA, FTA, MARAD, USCG, Records are retrieved by employee [FR Doc. 01–30837 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] FMCSA, BTS, TASC, and TSA. Any name and social security number. BILLING CODE 4910–62–P other Federal agencies that use the Retrieval is accomplished by use of system are responsible for Privacy Act telecommunications. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION compliance for their own employees. SAFEGUARDS: CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: Access to magnetic tape, disk records, Coast Guard Categories include application service and website records is limited to [USCG 2001–11149] provider records and credit cards of authorized agency personnel through government employees, and payment password, encryption, firewalls, and Guidelines for Assessing Merchant records for non-payroll related secured operating system. Hard copy Mariners through Demonstrations of expenses, payment records for payroll files are accessible to authorized Proficiency for Persons in Charge of made offline, collection records for personnel and are kept in locked file Medical Care payroll offsets, and labor cost records. cabinets during non-duty hours. AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: ACTION: Notice of availability and 5 U.S.C 301; 49 U.S.C. 322; 31 U.S.C. Original payment vouchers and request for comments. 3512 (b). supporting documentation are retained and disposed in compliance with the SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces PURPOSE(S): General Records Schedules, National the availability of, and seeks public The purpose for collecting the data in Archives and Records Administration, comments on, the national performance the DAFIS and Delphi System of Washington, DC 20408. The following measures proposed here for use as Records is to control and facilitate the schedules apply: General Records guidelines when mariners demonstrate accounting and reporting of financial Schedule (GRS) 1, Civilian Personnel their proficiency as Persons in Charge of transactions for DOT. Records; GRS 2, Payrolling and Pay Medical Care. These measures were Administration Records; GRS 3, developed from recommendations and ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE Procurement, Supply and Grant input provided by the Merchant Marine SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND Records; GRS 4, Property Disposal Personnel Advisory Committee THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: Records; GRS 5, Budget Preparation, (MERPAC). Accounting office personnel use these Presentation, and Appointment Records; DATES: Comments related material must records to: Provide employees with off- GRS 6, Accountable Officers’ Accounts line paychecks, travel advances, travel reach the Docket Management Facility Records; GRS 7, Expenditure on or before February 19, 2002. reimbursements, travel processing, and Accounting Records; GRS 8, Stores, ADDRESSES: Please identify your other official reimbursements; Facilitate Plant and Cost Accounting Records; comments and related material by the the distribution of labor charges for and, GRS 9, Travel and Transportation docket number of this rulemaking costing purposes; Track outstanding Records. travel advances, receivables, and other [USCG 2001–11149]. Then, to make sure non-payroll amounts paid to employees, SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: they enter the docket just once, submit etc.; and, Clear advances that were made Director, Office of Financial them by just one of the following means: through the system in the form of off- Management (B–30), Office of the (1) By mail to the Docket Management line paychecks, payments for excess Secretary, Office of Financial Facility, U.S. Department of household goods made on behalf of the Management, 400 Seventh Street SW., Transportation, room PL–401, 400 employee, garnishments, overdue travel Washington, DC 20590. Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC advances, etc. See Prefatory Statement 20590–0001. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: of General Routine Uses. (2) By delivery to room PL–401 on the Inquiries should be directed to the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 DISCLOSURES TO CONSUMER REPORTING managers of the accounting office Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, AGENCIES: supporting the employee’s agency. between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Disclosures pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Agency officials will contact the System through Friday, except Federal holidays. 552a(b)(12): Disclosures may be made Manager listed above if any centralized The telephone number is 202–366– from this system to ‘‘consumer reporting support is required for responses. 9329.
VerDate 11
(3) By fax to the Docket Management within the STCW a mariner must • Your name and address; Facility at 202–493–2251. demonstrate to meet the STCW section. • The docket number for this Notice (4) Electronically through the Web Next we give a series of examples of [USCG 2001–11149]; site for the Docket Management System Performance Conditions, a set of • The specific section of the at http://dms.dot.gov. Performance Behaviors for each performance measures to which each In choosing among these means, Performance Condition, and a set of comment applies; and please give due regard to the recent Performance Standards for each • The reason for each comment. difficulties with delivery of mail by the Performance Behavior. You may mail, deliver, fax, or U.S. Postal Service to Federal facilities. For example, if the Competency to electronically submit your comments The Docket Management Facility demonstrate is: ‘‘Provide medical care to and related material to the Docket maintains the public docket for this the sick and injured while they remain Management Facility, using an address notice. Comments and related material on board,’’ a Performance Condition for or fax number listed in ADDRESSES. received from the public, as well as that Competency demonstrating Please do not submit the same comment documents mentioned in this Notice, knowledge, understanding, and or material more than once. If you mail will become part of this docket and will proficiency is: In a graded practical or deliver your comments and material, be available for inspection or copying at exercise, given a patient simulating a they must be on 81⁄2-by-11-inch paper, room PL–401 on the Plaza level of the head injury, * * * and the quality of the copy should be Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, A Performance Behavior for that clear enough for copying and scanning. SW., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. Condition is: * * * the candidate will If you mail your comments and material and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, demonstrate the techniques for and would like to know whether the except Federal holidays. You may also conducting a neurological assessment. Docket Management Facility received find this docket on the Internet at A Performance Standard for that them, please enclose a stamped, self- http://dms.dot.gov. Behavior is: The candidate correctly addressed postcard or envelope. The The measures proposed here are also demonstrates the following assessment Coast Guard will consider all comments available from Mr. Mark Gould, techniques and states the significance of and material received during the 60-day Maritime Personnel Qualifications each finding: (a) Pupillary reaction; (b) comment period. Division, Office of Operating and Level of consciousness; (c) Verbal Once we have considered all Environmental Standards, Commandant communication; and (d) Sensory motor comments and related material, we will (G–MSO–1), U.S. Coast Guard status. publish a final version of the national Headquarters, telephone 202–267–0229, If the mariner properly meets all of performance measures for use as or e-mail address the Performance Standards, he or she guidelines by the general public. [email protected]. passes the practical demonstration. If he Individuals and institutions assessing or she fails to properly carry out any of the competence of mariners may refine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the Standards, he or she fails it. the final version of these measures and questions on this Notice or on the develop innovative alternatives. If you national performance measures Why Is the Coast Guard Taking This vary from the final version of these proposed here, e-mail or call Mr. Gould Action? measures, however, you must submit where indicated under ADDRESSES. For The Coast Guard is taking this action your alternative to the National questions on viewing or submitting to comply with STCW, as amended in Maritime Center for approval by the material to the docket, call Ms. Dorothy 1995 and incorporated into domestic Coast Guard under 46 CFR 10.303(e) Beard, Chief, Dockets, Department of regulations at 46 CFR parts 10, 12, and before you use it as part of an approved Transportation, telephone 202–366– 15 in 1997. Guidance from the course or training program. 9329. International Maritime Organization on Dated: December 6, 2001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: shipboard assessments of proficiency Joseph J. Angelo, suggests that Parties develop standards What Action Is the Coast Guard and measures of performance for Director, of Standards, Marine Safety and Taking? Environmental Protection. practical tests as part of their programs Section A–VI/4–2 of the Code for training and assessing seafarers. Assessment Guidelines for Table A–VI/ accompanying the International 4–2 Convention on Standards of Training, How May I Participate in This Action? You may participate in this action by Specification for Minimum Standard of Certification and Watchkeeping for Competency Seafarers (STCW), 1978, as amended in submitting comments and related 1995, articulates qualifications for material on the national performance Proficiency for Persons in Charge of ensuring merchant mariners’ attaining measures proposed here. (Although the Medical Care the minimum standard of competence Coast Guard does not seek public Each candidate for an STCW through demonstrations of their comment on the measures endorsement as Person in Charge of proficiency as Persons in Charge of recommended by MERPAC, as district Medical Care must meet the standards Medical Care. The Coast Guard tasked from the measures proposed here, those of competence set out in STCW Code MERPAC with referring to the Section, measures are available on the Internet at Table A–VI/4–2. To accomplish this, he modifying and specifying it as it the homepage of MERPAC, http:// or she must: deemed necessary, and recommending www.uscg.mil/hq/g–m/advisory/ • Complete approved education and national performance measures. The merpac/merpac.htm.) These measures training and meet all the competencies Coast Guard has reviewed the measures are available on the Internet at http:// listed in the table; recommended by MERPAC and has dms.dot.gov, under this docket number • Pass a written examination for the developed a final set that we are [USCG 2001–11149]. They are also portion of the competencies on proposing here for use as guidelines for available from Mr. Gould where knowledge and understanding; and assessing that proficiency. indicated under ADDRESSES. If you • Successfully accomplish a practical The guidelines are set up as follows: submit written comments please demonstration of skill for selected First we set forth the Competency include— competencies.
VerDate 11
The United States Coast Guard removing sutures; identifying wounds for evacuation; and methods of requires each mariner seeking that may be sutured and criteria for cooperation with health authorities in proficiency as Person in Charge of removing sutures; signs, symptoms, and port. Medical Care aboard ship to attend a emergency treatment for acute Demonstrations of Skill course approved by the National abdominal conditions; steps involved in Maritime Center. For this reason, these minor surgical procedures; steps for In addition to passing a written guidelines contain the assessment treating an abdominal evisceration; examination, the competency entitled criteria for both requirements, bandaging a sucking chest wound; ‘‘Provide medical care to the sick and knowledge (listed in the paragraph identifying general principles of nursing injured while they remain on board’’ below) and skill, Table A–VI/4–2. care; inserting or simulating inserting a requires a practical demonstration of urinary drainage catheter (male and skill to assess proficiency. These Written Assessments female); inserting a naso-gastric tube; assessment guidelines establish the The knowledge-based or injecting medicine by intramuscular and conditions under which the assessment understanding-based portion of the subcutaneous route; signs, symptoms will occur, the performance or behavior following competencies may be assessed and treatments for hyperglycemia, the candidate is to accomplish, and the through a written multiple-choice anaphylaxis, dehydration, gonorrhea, standards against which to measure the examination. The candidate must syphilis, genital herpes, systemic performance. The examiner should use achieve a minimum passing grade of infections, malaria, and hepatitis A and a checklist in conducting assessments of 70% in each kind of knowledge or B; signs of alcoholism and drug abuse, practical demonstrations of skill. understanding within the competency: signs of and treatment for toothache and Checklists allow a training institution or Signs and symptoms of bleeding; signs other dental problems; sings, symptoms, designated examiner to avoid and symptoms of burns, scalds and and treatments for gynecological overlooking critical tasks when frostbite; types of wounds and their conditions, pregnancy and childbirth; evaluating a candidate’s practical treatment; signs of infection; procedures methods to determine cause of death demonstration. Training institutions to manage systemic pain; procedures to and how to prepare a body for storage and designated examiners should manage pain before cleaning; uses of at sea; personal hygiene; preventing develop their own checklists for use in lidocaine with and without disease aboard ship; preventing disease conducting the assessments in a epinephrine; suturing a wound and through vaccination; preparing a patient complete and structured manner.
TABLE A–VI/4–2.—GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT—SPECIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARD OF COMPETENCE—PERSONS IN CHARGE OF MEDICAL CARE
Knowledge, understanding STCW competence and proficiency Performance condition Performance behavior Performance standard
Provide medical care to Care of the casualty in- In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate correctly the sick and injured volving head and spinal cise, given a patient onstrate the techniques demonstrates the fol- while they remain on injuries*. simulating a head injury. for conducting a neuro- lowing assessment tech- board. logical assessment. niques and states the significance of each find- ing: 1. Pupillary reaction; 2. Level of consciousness; 3. Verbal communication; and 4. Sensory motor status. Care of the casualty in- In a graded practical exer- The candidate will use ex- The candidate correctly: volving injuries to ear, cise, given a patient ternal bandages to con- Applies an external ban- nose, throat and eye*. simulating a bleed from trol bleeding from the dage to stem bleeding of the ear. ear. the ear; and 2. Does not pack the ear. In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate: cise, given a patient onstrate the proper tech- 1. Positions the patient sit- simulating a nose bleed. niques to stop bleeding ting upright with the from the nose. head tilted forward; 2. Pinches the bridge of the nose; and 3. places ice on the back of the neck or the fore- head. In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The student: cise, given a patient onstrate the proper 1. Immobilizes the object simulating an object im- method of bandaging an impaled in eye; and paled in the eye. eye impaled by a foreign 2. bandages both the af- object. fected and unaffected eye.
VerDate 11
TABLE A–VI/4–2.—GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT—SPECIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARD OF COMPETENCE—PERSONS IN CHARGE OF MEDICAL CARE—Continued
Knowledge, understanding STCW competence and proficiency Performance condition Performance behavior Performance standard
In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate flushes the cise, given a patient onstrate the proper affected eye for at least simulating a foreign liq- method of treating a for- 20 minutes with copious uid or solid substance in eign liquid or solid sub- amount of water (saline, the eye. stance in the eye. if immediately available) to wash away chemicals or solid particles. In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The student: cise, given a patient onstrate the proper 1. Anticipates a com- simulating a soft-tissue method of treating a promised airway; and injury to the throat. soft-tissue injury to the 2. Maintains airway man- throat. agement techniques. Care of the casualty in- In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate correctly volving external and in- cise, given a patient onstrate application of demonstrates the: ternal bleeding*. simulating bleeding pressure dressing and 1. Location of the brachial wound. location of pressure and femoral pressure points. points; and 2. Application of a pres- sure dressing at the would site. In a graded practical exer- The candidate will state The candidate correctly cise, given a patient when to use a tourniquet. states that a tourniquet simulating an arterial will only be applied bleed of an extremity. when: 1. All other methods of controlling bleeding have failed; and 2. Continued bleeding is life-threatening. Care of the casualty in- In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate correctly volving fractures, dis- cise, given a patient onstrate the splinting of applies a pillow splint to locations and muscular simulating a fracture of an ankle fracture and an ankle fracture, fol- injuries*. the ankle and a dis- immobilization of a dis- lowing the following pro- located shoulder, and located shoulder. cedures: materials for splinting. 1. Manually stabilizes the fractured ankle or leg; 2. Assesses distal neuro- vascular function; 3. Applies pillow to the ankle and lower leg, wrapping it around the ankle and leg and keep- ing the foot exposed; 4. Secures pillow using cravats or other device to tie ends together; 5. Re-assesses distal neuro-vascular function; and 6. Seeks medical advice by radio. The candidate correctly immobilizes a dislocated shoulder using the fol- lowing procedures: 1. Assesses distal neuro- vascular; 2. Applies sling using tri- angular bandage or commercial-type sling (knot of sling should not be pressing on neck); 3. Using a cravat or other binding, applies a swath over sling and around body; and 4. Re-assesses distal neuro-vascular func- tions.
VerDate 11
TABLE A–VI/4–2.—GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT—SPECIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARD OF COMPETENCE—PERSONS IN CHARGE OF MEDICAL CARE—Continued
Knowledge, understanding STCW competence and proficiency Performance condition Performance behavior Performance standard
Care of the casualty in- In a graded practical exer- The candidate will dem- The candidate correctly volving techniques of cise, given a simulated onstrate a method to su- demonstrates a standard sewing and clamping*. wound, suturing needle ture a would and meth- instrument tie to include and thread, clamps, and od to remove sutures. the following: suture-removal scissors. 1. Ties all knots to one side of the wound; 2. Begins sutures at center of wound and proceeds outward; and 3. Uses strategic sutures to match up obvious points in irregular wounds. The candidate correctly demonstrates suture re- moval to include the fol- lowing: 1. Lifts suture with forceps; 2. Cuts suture near skin surface; and 3. Pulls suture out holding the knotted end of the suture. In a graded practical eval- The candidate will ban- The candidate correctly uation, given a simu- dage a sucking chest demonstrates the fol- lated chest wound, oc- wound. lowing: clusive dressing mate- 1. Surveys and determines rials, and tape. the entrance (and exit) wound(s); 2. Covers wound(s) with occlusive dressing; 3. Tapes three sides of the dressing over the wound; and 4. Monitors respiratory ef- fort of victim. Nursing care* ...... In a graded practical eval- The candidate will insert or The candidate correctly uation, given a real pa- simulate inserting a uri- demonstrates the fol- tient or urinary-catheter- nary-drainage catheter lowing: ization simulator, and (male and female). 1. Maintenance of correct supplies for urinary-cath- sterile techniques; eter insertion. 2. Cleansing of the mea- tus; 3. Lubrication of the cath- eter; 4. Insertion of the catheter into urethra until urine drains; and 5. Opening of the roller clamp of the tubing. In a graded practical eval- The candidate will insert a The candidate correctly uation, given a man- naso-gastric tube. demonstrates the fol- nequin and supplies for lowing: nasogastric tube inser- 1. Utilizes proper pre- tion. cautions for isolating bodily substances; 2. Measures length of tube to insert; 3. Lubricates tube; 4. Positions patient; 5. Inserts tube through nose; 6. Demonstrates one test to confirm placement; and 7. Secures tube to nose with tape.
VerDate 11
TABLE A–VI/4–2.—GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT—SPECIFICATION OF MINIMUM STANDARD OF COMPETENCE—PERSONS IN CHARGE OF MEDICAL CARE—Continued
Knowledge, understanding STCW competence and proficiency Performance condition Performance behavior Performance standard
In a graded practical eval- The candidate will admin- The candidate: uation, given a real or ister medication injection 1. Confirms the medicine simulated patient, and by intramuscular route. order, calculates proper supplies for injections of dosage, identifies cor- medicine. rect medicine and con- firmed expiration date; 2. Draws up correct dos- age from medicine vial using sterile technique, checking medicine to medicine order at least three times and using correct needle and sy- ringe for injection based on location of injection and amount of medicine; 3. Locates the injection site (deltoid, glutens, or vastus lateralis); 4. Cleanses the injection site with alcohol pad using circular motion; 5. Inserts the needle into muscle at 90° angle; and 6. Aspirates the syringe, and, if no blood, injects the medication. In a graded practical eval- The candidate will inject The candidate: uation, given a real or medicine by subcuta- 1. Confirms the medicine simulated patient, and neous route. order, calculates proper supplies for injections of dosage, identifies cor- medicine. rect medicine and con- firms expiration date; 2. Draws up the correct dosage from medicine vial using sterile tech- nique, checking medi- cine to medicine order at least three times and using correct needle and syringe for injection based on location of in- jection and amount of medicine; 3. Locates the injection site; 4. Cleanses the injection site with alcohol pad using circular motion; 5. Inserts the needle into subcutaneous tissue at 45° angle; and 6. Aspirates the syringe, and, if no blood, injects the medicine. * Indicates a proficiency from Table A–VI/4–2
VerDate 11
[FR Doc. 01–31173 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Description of Relief Sought/ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BILLING CODE 4910–15–M Disposition: To permit MAL to operate certain aircraft under part 135 without Federal Aviation Administration a TSO–C112 (Mode S) transponder DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION installed in the aircraft. Grant, 11/21/ RTCA Special Committee 196: Night 2001, Exemption No. 7663. Vision Goggle (NVG) Appliances and Federal Aviation Administration Equipment Docket No.: FAA–2001–10984 [Summary Notice No. PE–2001–94] (previously Docket No. 28842). AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Petitioner: Air Tahoma. ACTION: Dispositions of Petitions Issued Notice of RTCA Special Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR Committee 196 meeting. AGENCY: Federal Aviation § 135.143(c)(2). SUMMARY: Administration (FAA), DOT. Description of Relief Sought/ The FAA is issuing this notice Disposition: To permit Air Tahoma to to advise the public of a meeting of ACTION: Notice of Dispositions of prior RTCA Special Committee 199: Night operate certain aircraft under part 135 petitions. Vision Goggle (NVG) Appliances and without a TSO–C112 (Mode S) Equipment. SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking transponder installed in the aircraft. provisions governing the application, Grant, 11/21/2001, Exemption No. 7664. DATES: The meeting will be held January processing, and disposition of petitions 2, 2002, starting at 1:00 p.m. Docket No.: FAA–2001–9786 for exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at (previously Docket No. 26029). of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this Northrop Grumman Electro-Optical notice contains a summary of Petitioner: ABX Air, Inc., dba Systems, 12024 Forestgate Drive, Dallas, dispositions of certain petitions Airborne Express. TX 75243. This meeting will also take previously received. The purpose of this Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR place by telecon. Please RSVP to Lorry notice is to improve the public’s §§ 121.503(b), 121.505(a), and Faber (609–485–5461 or awareness of, and participation in, this 121.511(a). [email protected]) or Jim Winkel aspect of FAA’s regulatory activities. (972–840–5775 or jwinkel@LITTON– Description of Relief Sought/ Neither publication of this notice nor EOS.com) if you intend to participate by Disposition: To permit ABX flightcrews the inclusion or omission of information telephone. Those parties interested in consisting of two pilots and one flight in the summary is intended to affect the attending the meeting at the Dallas engineer to complete certain legal status of any petition or its final location need to RSVP NLT December disposition. transcontinental flight schedules before 20th, 2001. being provided with at least 16 hours of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rest. Grant, 11/23/2001, Exemption No. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Forest Rawls (202) 267–8033, Sandy 5167F. RTCA Secretariat, 1140 Connecticut Buchanan-Sumter (202) 267–7271, or Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20036; Vanessa Wilkins (202) 267–8029, Office Docket No.: FAA–2001–10587. telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202) of Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal Petitioner: American Airlines, Inc. 833–9434; Web site http://www.rtca.org. Aviation Administration, 800 Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Independence Avenue, SW., to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Washington, DC 20591. 121.457(a) and V.A.1. of Appendix I to part 121. Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92–463, 5 This notice is published pursuant to U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby 14 CFR 11.85 and 11.91. Description of Relief Sought/ given for a Special Committee 196 Issued in Washington, DC, on December Disposition: To permit American meeting. The agenda will include: 13, 2001. employees performing safety-sensitive • January 2: Donald P. Byrne, functions for TWA Airlines LLC to • Opening Session (Welcome and Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. perform identical functions for Introductory Remarks, Agenda American without being subject to Overview, Approve Minutes of Previous Dispositions of Petitions additional preemployment drug testing. Meeting). Docket No.: FAA–2001–9815 Grant, 11/14/2001, Exemption No. 7661. • Overview of SC–196 Working (previously Docket No. 29397). Docket No.: FAA–2001–9942. Group Activities. Petitioner: Japan Airlines Company, • Operational Concept/Requirements. Ltd. Petitioner: McMahon Helicopter • Minimum Operational Performance Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR Services. Standard (MOPS)—Night Vision 145.47(b). Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR Imaging Systems Equipment. Description of Relief Sought/ § 135.152(a). • Working Group 5 (Training Disposition: To permit JAL to use the Description of Relief Sought/ Guidelines/Considerations). calibration standards of the Metrology • Disposition: To permit MHS to operate EUROCAE Working Group 57 Institute of Japan in lieu of the its three Sikorsky S–58T helicopters Activities. calibration standards of the U.S. • (Registration Nos. N58S, N589S, and Other NVG Regulatory and National Institute of Standards and N598S, and Serial Nos. 1502, 740, and Advisory Group Activities. Technology, to test its inspection and • 1196, respectively) without those Advisory Circular 27–IB and test equipment. Grant, 10/31/2001, helicopters being equipped with an Advisory Circular 29–2C Amendment Exemption No. 7050A. approved digital flight data recorder. for inclusion of NVG Certification of Docket No.: FAA–2001–11025. Grant, 11/14/2001, Exemption No. 7662. Normal and Transport Category Petitioner: Miller Aviation, L.L.C. Rotorcraft. Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR [FR Doc. 01–31183 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] • Technical Standard Order for Night § 135.143(c)(12). BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Vision Goggles.
VerDate 11
• Aviation Rulemaking Advisory PFC Level: $4.50. letter dated September 24, 2001. Committee for Night Vision Goggles Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Therefore, the FAA did not rule on Training and Operations. Decision: $34,405. these projects in this decision. • Issue Paper, ‘‘Human Factors Issues Earliest Charge Effective Date: January Decision Date: November 1, 2001. for Civil Aviation Use of Night Vision 1, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Goggles’’. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: • Marlys Vandervelde, San Francisco Closing Session (NVG Research April 1, 2004. Airports District Office, (650) 876–2806. Requests, Status of SC–196, Other Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Public Agency: Waterloo Airport Business, Establish Agenda for Next Collect PFC’s: Part 135 air taxi/ Commission, Waterloo, Iowa. Meeting, Date and Place of Next commercial operators filing FAA Form Application Number: 01–04–C–00– Meeting). 1800–31. ALO. Attendance is open to the interested Determination: Approved. Based on Application Type: Impose and use a public but limited to space availability. information contained in the public PFC. With the approval of the chairmen, agency’s application, the FAA has PFC Level: $4.50. members of the public may present oral determined that the approved class Total PFC Revenue Approved in this statements at the meeting. Persons accounts for less than 1 percent of the Decision: $291,800. wishing to present statements or obtain total annual enplanements at Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1, information should contact the person Rhinelander-Oneida County Airport. 2003. listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Brief Description of Projects Approved Estimated Charge Expiration Date: CONTACT section. Members of the public for Collection and Use: Communication July 1, 2004. may present a written statement to the tower. Repaint runway with beads. Class of Air Carriers not Required to Committee at any time. Airfield signage. Runway safety area Collect PFC’s: None. Issued in Washington, DC, on December grading. Survey and clear obstructions. Brief Description of Projects Approved 10, 2001. PFC application administrative costs. for Collection and Use: Runway 12/30 Janice L. Peters, Decision Date: October 5, 2001. rejuvenation. Runway 18/36 FAA Special Assistance, RTCA Advisory FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rejuvenation. Reconstruct taxiway E. Committee. Daniel J. Millenacker, Minneapolis Reconstruct and overlay taxiway A. [FR Doc. 01–31181 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Airports District Office, (612) 713–4350. Brief Description of Project Approved BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Public Agency: Port of Oakland, for Use: Terminal building Oakland, California. modernization—construction. Application Number: 01–10–C–00– Decision Date: November 6, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OAK. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Aviation Administration Application Type: Impose and use a Lorna Sandridge, Central Region PFC. Airports Division, (816) 329–2641. Notice of Passenger Facility Charge PFC Level: $3.00. Public Agency: City of Macon (PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Municipal Aviation Department, Macon, Decision: $32,000,000. Georgia. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Earliest Charge Effective Date: Application Number: 01–01–C–00– Administration (FAA), DOT. February 1, 2002. MCN. ACTION: Monthly Notice to PFC Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Application Type: Impose and use a Approvals and Disapprovals. In October 1, 2003. PFC. November 2001, there were 15 Classes of Air Carriers Not Required PFC Level: $4.50. applications approved. This notice also to Collect PFC’s: (1) Non-scheduled/on- Total PFC Revenue Approved in this includes information on one demand air carriers filing FAA Form Decision: $356,842. application, approved in October 2001, 1800–31; (2) commuters or small Earliest Charge Effective Date: March inadvertently left off the October 2001 certificated air carriers filing 1, 2002. notice. Additionally, seven approved Department of Transportation Form Estimated Charge Expiration Date: amendments to previously approved 298–C T1 or E1. April 1, 2005. applications are listed. Determination: Approved. Based on Class of Air Carriers not Required to SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly information contained in the public Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals agency’s application, the FAA has operators. and disapprovals under the provisions determined that each approved class Determination: Approved. Based on of the Aviation Safety and Capacity accounts for less than 1 percent of the the information in the public agency’s Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the total annual enplanements at Oakland application, the FAA has determined Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of International Airport. that the approved class accounts for less 1990) Pub. L. 101–508) and part 158 of Brief Description of Projects Approved than 1 percent of the total annual the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 for Collection and Use: Terminal One enplanements at Middle Georgia CFR part 158). This notice is published ticket counter expansion, phase 1. Regional Airport. pursuant to paragraph d of § 158.29. Overlay runway 11/29. Terminals One Brief Description of Projects Approved and Two restroom improvements. for Collection and Use: Rehabilitate PFC Applications Approved Multi-user system equipment in runway 5/23. Passenger terminal Public Agency: City of Rhinelander Terminal One. improvements. and Oneida County, Rhinelander, Brief Description of Withdrawn Brief Description of Disapproved Wisconsin. Projects: Construct remote overnight Project: Airport entrance road. Application Number: 01–07–C–00– aircraft parking apron. Terminal One Determination: The FAA has RHI. gate improvement. determined that this project does not Application Type: Impose and use a Determination: These projects were meet the requirements of PFC. withdrawn by the public agency by § 158.25(b)(14)(ii). The public agency
VerDate 11
did not provide a list of alternative Application Type: Impose and use a PFC Level: $4.50. projects to use PFC revenue. PFC. Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Decision Date: November 8, 2001. PFC Level: $3.00. Decision: $1,023,400. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Earliest Charge Effective Date: March Daniel Gaetan, Atlanta Airports District Decision: $26,005,000. 1, 2002. Office, (404) 305–7146. Earliest Charge Effective Date: Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Public Agency: Kenton County October 1, 2002. October 1, 2002. Airport Board, Covington, Kentucky. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Application Number: 01–07–C–00– October 1, 2004. Collect PFC’s: Part 135 air taxi/ CVG. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to commercial operators. Application Type: Impose and use a Collect PFC’s: Part 135 (air taxi). Determination: Approved. Based on PFC. Determination: Approved. Based on the information in the public agency’s PFC Levbel: $3.00. information contained in the public application, the FAA has determined Total PFC Revenue Approved in This agency’s application, the FAA has that the approved class accounts for less Decision: $27,138,000. determined that the approved class than 1 percent of the total annual Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, accounts for less than 1 percent of the enplanements at Austin Straubel 2002. total annual enplanements at the International Airport. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Nashville International Airport. Brief Description of Projects Approved June 1, 2003. Brief Description of Projects Approved for Collection and Use: Parallel taxiways Classes of Air Carriers Not Required for Collection and Use: Donelson Pike D and M construction. PFC to Collect PFC’s: (1) Part 121 and Terminal Drive relocation. Inbound administrative costs. supplemental operators which operate baggage carousel security cages. Elevator Decision Date: November 11, 2001. at the airport without an operating on A concourse. Airfield pavement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: agreement with public agency and rehabilitation. Airfield hold bar Daniel J. Millenacker, Minneapolis enplane less than 1,500 passengers per modifications. Precision approach path Airports District Office, (612) 713–4350. year; (2) Part 135 on-demand air taxis, indicator lights on runways 2L and 31. Public Agency: Yakima Air Terminal both fixed wing and rotary. Aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle. Board, Yakima, Washington. Determination: Approved. Based on Cargo area infrastructure and utility Application Number: 01–07–I–00– the information in the public agency’s improvements. Live scan fingerprint YKM. application, the FAA has determined equipment. Application Type: Impose a PFC. each of the approved classes accounts PFC Level: $3.00. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Total PFC Revenue Approved in This for less than 1 percent of the total Cynthia K. Wills, Memphis Airports Decision: $456,000. annual enplanements at Cincinnati/ District Office, (901) 544–3495. Earliest Charge Effective Date: March Northern Kentucky International Public Agency: Telluride Regional 1, 2002. Airport. Airport Authority, Telluride, Colorado. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Brief Description of Projects Approved Application Number: 01–03–I–00– March 1, 2004. for Collection and Use: Concourse C TEX. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to improvements: south infill expansion; Application Type: Impose a PFC. Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial and north infill expansion and entry PFC Level: $4.50. operators filing FAA Form 1800–31. and canopy renovation. Deicing system Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Determination: Approved. Based on enhancements: in stream treatment Decision: $430,000. the information in the public agency’s system engineering/design; and glycol Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1, application, the FAA has determined processing and recycling facility. 2002. that the approved class accounts for less Taxiway M extension and connecting Estimated Charge Expiration Date: than 1 percent of the total annual taxiways. Taxiways N extension. January 1, 2007. enplanements at Yakima Air Terminal— Aircraft rescue and firefighting satellite Class of Air Carriers Not Required to McAllister Field. building (phase I). Planning study Collect PFC’s: Air taxi operators filing Brief Description of Project Approved updates: airport master plan update FAA Form 1800–31. for Collection: Runway 27 safety area (2002); and part 150 study update Determination: Approved. Based on improvements, phase II. (2003). information contained in the public Decision Date: November 13, 2001. Brief Description of Projects Partially agency’s application, the FAA has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Approved for Collection and Use: determined that the approved class Suzanne Lee-Pang, Seattle Airports Runway 27 safety zone improvements: accounts for less than 1 percent of the District Office, (425) 227–2654. realign taxiway M; and runway 27 total annual enplanements at the Public Agency: County of Routt, runway safety and area improvements. Telluride Regional Airport. Hayden, Colorado. Determination: The FAA has Brief Description of Projects Approved Application Number: 01–04–C–00– determined that the threshold relocation for Collection: Land acquisition. Design HDN. should not be constructed as proposed engineering. Application Type: Impose and use a because of safety concerns. Therefor, the Decision Date: November 13, 2001. PFC. project was partially approved. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PFC Level: $4.50. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Chris Schaffer, Denver Airports District Total PFC Revenue Approved in this O. Bowers, Memphis Airports District Office, (303) 342–1258. Decision: $150,833. Office, (901) 544–3495. Public Agency: County of Brown, Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, Public Agency: Metropolitan Green Bay, Wisconsin. 2002. Nashville Airport Authority, Nashville, Application Numbers: 01–03–C–00– Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Tennessee. GRB. November 1, 2002. Application Number: 01–09–C–00– Application Type: Impose and use a Class of Air Carriers Not Required to BNA. PFC. Collect PFC’s: None.
VerDate 11
Brief Description of Projects Approved Application Type: Impose and use a J. Holding apron, runway 28 end. for Collection and Use: Runway 10/28 PFC. Security fencing and power gates. distance to go signs. Snow removal PFC Level: $4.50. Screen wall and blast deflectors. equipment. Air carrier apron drainage Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Expansion of airline terminal. Snow (glycol containment). Master plan Decision: $1,520,320 removal equipment procurement. update. Taxiway A rehabilitation and Earliest Charge Effective Date: July 1, Rehabilitate southeast general aviation lighting improvements. 2016. apron and airline apron. Loading bridge. Brief Description of Withdrawn Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Master plan. Snow removal equipment Project: Construction of new taxiway. July 1, 2017. procurement (snow blower). Friction Determination: This project was Class of Air Carriers Not Required to testing vehicle. Rehabilitate airport withdrawn by the public agency by Collect PFC’S: Part 135 air taxi/ access road. Relocate water main. Jet letter dated August 17, 2001. Therefore, commercial operators. bridge for regional carrier. Restroom the FAA did not rule on this project in Determination: Approved. Based on addition to airline terminal. Relocate this decision. the information in the public agency’s beacon. Security fencing. Conduct phase Decision Date: November 15, 2001. application, the FAA has determined I of financial and land use plan. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that the approved class accounts for less Decision Date: November 23, 2001. Chris Schaffer, Denver Airports District than 1 percent of the total annual FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office, (303) 342–1258. enplanements at Quad City Arlene B. Draper, Detroit Airports Public Agency: Wicomico County International Airport. District Office, (734) 487–7282. Airport Commission, Salisbury, Brief Description of Projects Approved Public Agency: County of Beltrami Maryland. for Collection and Use: Aircraft rescue and City of Bemidji, Bemidji, Application Number: 01–01–C–00– and firefighting equipment purchase. Minnesota. SBY Purchase of regional jet boarding Application Number: 01–02–C–00– Application Type: Impose and use a bridges. BJI. PFC. Decision Date: November 23, 2001. Application Type: Impose and use a PFC Level: $3.00. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PFC. Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Richard A. Pur, Chicago Airports PFC Level: $4.50. Decision: $44,892 District Office, (847) 294–7527. Total PFC Revenue Approved in This Earliest Charge Effective Date: Public Agency: Northwestern Decision: $201,952. February 1, 2002. Regional Airport Commission, Traverse Earliest Charge Effective Date: Estimated Charge Expiration Date: City, Michigan. February 1, 2002. October 1, 2004. Application Number: 01–02–C–00– Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Class of Air Carriers Not Required to TVC. August 1, 2003. Collect PFC’S: Both unscheduled Part Application Type: Impose and use a Classes of Air Carriers Not Required 135 and Part 121 charter operators for PFC. to Collect PFC’s: (1) Non-scheduled/on- hire to the general public. PFC Level: $4.50. demand air carriers filing FAA Form Determination: Approved. Based on Total PFC Revenue Approved in This 1800–31; (2) commuters or small the information in the public agency’s Decision: $420,019. certificated air carriers filing application, the FAA has determined Earliest Charge Effective Date: January Department of Transportation Form that the approved class accounts for less 1, 2017. 298–C or E1. than 1 percent of the total annual Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Determination: Approved. Based on enplanements at Salisbury-Ocean City: January 1, 2018. information contained in the public Wicomico Regional Airport. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to agency’s application, the FAA has Brief Description of Projects Approved Collect PFC’S: Part 135 air taxi/ determined that each approved class for Collection and Use: Develop PFC commercial operators filing FAA Form accounts for less than 1 percent of the program and PFC application. Install 1800–31. total annual enplanements at Bemidji/ airfield guidance signs and electrical Determination: Approved. Based on Beltrami County Airport. vault. Design and construct fillet the information in the public agency’s Brief Description of Projects Approved widening for runway 5/23 with joint application, the FAA has determined for Collection and Use: Acquire aircraft reconstruction. Construct taxiway B that the approved class accounts for less rescue and firefighting vehicle. Improve extension and overlay taxiway B. than 1 percent of the total annual terminal. Replace runway and taxiway Rehabilitate taxiway C. Rehabilitate enplanements at Cherry Capital Airport. lighting cables. Install deer fence (phase taxiway D. Acquire land. Runway 5 and Brief Description of Project Approved I). Expand auto parking lot. Improve 23 approaches. Rehabilitate runway 5/ for Use: Design and construct new boundary fence. Seal coat parking lot. 23 medium intensity runway lights and terminal building, ramp for new Install terminal security. PFC runway 5 runway end intensity lights. terminal, and taxiway for new terminal. application. Rehabilitate apron. Update Conduct environmental assessment. Brief Description of Projects Approved master plan. Replace snow removal Acquire snow removal equipment. for Collection and Use: Pavement sensor equipment. acquire passenger lift equipment. system. Terminal expansion. Connector Decision Date: November 23, 2001. Decision Date: November 21, 2001. taxiway. High intensity runway lights, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: runway 10/28. Terminal apron lighting. Daniel J. Millenacker, Minneapolis Eleanor Schifflin, Eastern Region Snow removal equipment procurement, Airports District Office, (612) 713–4350. Airports Division, (718) 553–3354. plow truck. Taxiway D. Tie-down apron Public Agency: Capital Region Airport Public Agency: Metropolitan Airport and taxi streets. Retention ponds. Authority, Lansing, Michigan. Authority of Rock Island County, Expand equipment storage building. Application Number: 01–04–C–00– Moline, Illinois. Deer control fence. Airfield signs. LAN. Application Number: 01–04–C–00– Taxiway to west hangar area. Application Type: Impose and use a MLI. Bituminous overlay taxiways A, B, and PFC.
VerDate 11
PFC Level: $4.50. plan/part 150 update. Relocate rental Earliest Charge Effective Date: Total PFC Revenue Approved in this car lot. National Pollutant Discharge February 1, 2002. Decision: $8,913.046. Elimination System (NPDES) permit— Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Earliest Charge Effective Date: July 1, mitigation phase II. NPDES permit— June 1, 2007. 2005. mitigation phase III. PFC consultation Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Estimated Charge Expiration Date: fees. Replace baggage claim equipment. Collect PFC’s: Non-scheduled air August 1, 2011. Baggage claim expansion. carriers and charter flights using aircraft Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Brief Description of Projects Approved with less than 10 seats. Collect PFC’s: Non-scheduled part 135 for Collection: Reconstruct taxiway Determination: Approved. Based on and air taxi operators. fillets. Gate expansion. Purchase and information contained in the public Determination: Approved. Based on install ground level loading bridges. agency’s application, the FAA has information contained in the public Decision Date: November 28, 2001. determined that the approved class agency’s application, the FAA has FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: accounts for less than 1 percent of the determined that the approved class Arlene B. Draper, Detroit Airports total annual enplanements at the Naples accounts for less than 1 percent of the District Office, (734) 487–7282. Municipal Airport. total annual enplanements at the Capital Public Agency: City of Naples Airport Brief Description of Project Approved City Airport. Authority, Naples, Florida. for Collection: Rehabilitate and extend Brief Description of Projects Approved Application Number: 01–03–I–00– taxiway B. for Collection and Use: Replace multi- APF. Decision Date: November 30, 2001. user flight information display system. Application Type: Impose a PFC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Replace security access control system. PFC Level: $3.00. Jennifer Ganley, Orlando Airports Overlay taxiway C and end of runway Total PFC Revenue Approved in this District Office, (407) 812–6331, 24. Reconstruct terminal appron. Master Decision: $850,000. extension 25.
AMENDMENTS TO PFC APPROVALS
Amended Amended Amendment No. city, state Amendment Original approved approved net PFC Original estimated estimated charge approved date net PFC revenue revenue charge exp. date exp. date
95–01–03–SAN, San Diego, CA ...... 08/23/01 $97,705,000 $105,896,731 09/01/00 03/01/01 98–02–C–01–SAN, San Diego, CA ...... 08/23/01 28,089,000 49,972,839 01/01/02 06/01/03 *96–01–1–01–TVC, Traverse City, MI ... 10/25/01 14,846,381 14,846,381 01/01/17 01/01/17 *96–04–C–02–SMF, Sacramento, CA ... 10/31/01 78,993,780 78,993,780 04/01/06 02/01/03 93–01–C–01–RNO, Reno, NV ...... 10/31/01 33,896,157 37,973,702 05/01/99 05/01/99 98–07–1–03–PHL, Philadelphia, PA ..... 11/09/01 672,000,000 946,267,790 07/01/07 02/01/11 99–08–U–02–PHL, Philadelphia, PA ..... 11/09/01 NA NA 07/01/07 02/01/11 Note: The amendments denoted by an asterisk (*) include a change to the PFC level charged from $3.00 per enplaned passenger to $4.50 per enplaned passenger. For Sacramento, CA and Traverse City, MI, this change is effective on January 1, 2002.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 12, 2001. 1990 (Title IX of the Omnibus Budget Vernon P. Rupinta, Program Manager, Barry Molar, Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. Orlando Airports District Office, 5950 Manager, Airports Financial Assistance 101–508) and part 158 of the Federal Hazeltine National Drive, Suite 400, Division. Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). Orlando, Florida 32822, (407) 812–6331, [FR Doc. 01–31184 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] DATES: Comments must be received on Extension 24. The application may be BILLING CODE 4910–13–M or before January 17, 2002. reviewed in person at this same location. ADDRESSES: Comments on this DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION application may be mailed or delivered SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA in triplicate to the FAA at the following proposes to rule and invites public Federal Aviation Administration address: Orlando Airports District comment on the application to use the Office, 5950 Hazeltine National Drive, revenue from a PFC at Palm Beach Notice of Intent To Rule on Application Suite 400, Orlando, Florida 32822. International Airport under the To Use the Revenue From a Passenger provisions of the Aviation Safety and Facility Charge (PFC) at Palm Beach In addition, one copy of any Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 (Title International Airport, West Palm comments submitted to the FAA must Beach, FL be mailed or delivered to Mr. Bruce V. IX of the Omnibus Budget Pelly, Director of Airports of the Palm Reconciliation Act of 1990) (Pub. L. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Beach County Department of Airports at 101–508) and part 158 of the Federal Administration (FAA), DOT. the following address: Palm Beach Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 158). County Department of Airports, 846 ACTION: Notice of intent to rule on On December 10, 2001, the FAA Palm Beach International Airport, West application. determined that the application to use Palm Beach, Florida 33406–1470. the revenue from a PFC submitted by SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and Air carriers and foreign air carriers Palm Beach County Department of invites public comment on the may submit copies of written comments Airports was substantially complete application to use the revenue from a previously provided to the Palm Beach within the requirements of section PFC at Palm Beach International Airport County Department of Airports under 158.25 of part 158. The FAA will under the provisions of the Aviation section 158.23 of part 158. approve or disapprove the application,
VerDate 11
in whole or in part, no later than March DATES: Comments must be received on immediately before, and after, biannual 27, 2002. or before February 19, 2002. national mobilizations carried out as The following is a brief overview of ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments part of the Buckle Up America (BUA) the application. to U.S. Department of Transportation Campaign. Participation by respondents PFC Application No.: 02–06–U–00– Dockets, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Plaza would be voluntary. The national PBI. 401, Washington, DC 20590. Docket No. mobilizations are conducted each year Level of the proposed PFC: $3.00 NHTSA–01–10911. during May and November. The Proposed charge effective date: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. mobilizations are designed to increase December 1, 2000. Alan Block, Contracting Officer’s seat belt and child restraint use through Proposed charge expiration date: education and enforcement of restraint December 1, 2005. Technical Representative, Office of Research and Traffic Records (NTS–31), laws. NHTSA would conduct four Total estimated net PFC revenue: survey waves per year over a three year $6,684,000. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, period beginning in 2002. During each Brief description of proposed year, NHTSA would conduct a survey SW., Room 6240, Washington, DC project(s): Construct Taxiway ‘‘A’’ and wave: (1) Immediately preceding the 20590. Canal Relocation; Construct Perimeter May Mobilization; (2) immediately Road. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the following the May Mobilization; (3) Class or classes of air carriers which Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, immediately preceding the November the public agency has requested not be before an agency submits a proposed Mobilization; and (4) immediately required to collect PFCs: Air Taxi/ collection of information to OMB for following the November Mobilization. Commercial Operators Filing FAA Form approval, it must publish a document in Each survey wave would be composed 1800–31. the Federal Register providing a 60-day of a national sample of 1200 Any person may inspect the comment period and otherwise consult respondents, as well as multiple application in person at the FAA office with members of the public and affected independent State samples of 500 listed above under FOR FURTHER agencies concerning each proposed respondents each. An average of 25 INFORMATION CONTACT. collection of information. The OMB has independent State samples would be In addition, any person may, upon promulgated regulations describing surveyed per survey wave across the request, inspect the application, notice what must be included in such a three year period, producing an average and other documents germane to the document. Under OMB’s regulations (at of 13,700 total interviews per survey application in person at the Palm Beach 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask wave. Prior to each mobilization, County Department of Airports. for public comment on the following: NHTSA would select specific States to Issued in Orlando, Florida on December (i) whether the proposed collection of be included among the independent 10, 2001. information is necessary for the proper State samples based on mobilization W. Dean Stringer, performance of the functions of the activities planned within the States. The Manager, Orlando Airports District Office, agency, including whether the surveys would collect information Southern Region. information will have practical utility; regarding public awareness of the [FR Doc. 01–31182 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] (ii) the accuracy of the agency’s mobilization, public perceptions of BILLING CODE 4910–13–M estimate of the burden of the proposed enforcement of motor vehicle restraint collection of information, including the laws, public attitudes concerning motor validity of the methodology and vehicle restraint use, and the public’s DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION assumptions used; reported use of motor vehicle restraint (iii) how to enhance the quality, systems. National Highway Traffic Safety utility, and clarity of the information to In conducting the proposed survey, Administration be collected; and the interviewers would use computer- (iv) how to minimize the burden of assisted telephone interviewing to [U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–01–10911] the collection of information on those reduce interview length and minimize Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping who are to respond, including the use recording errors. A Spanish-language Requirements of appropriate automated, electronic, translation and bilingual interviewers mechanical, or other technological would be used to minimize language AGENCY: National Highway Traffic collection techniques or other forms of barriers to participation. The proposed Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. information technology, e.g., permitting survey would be anonymous and ACTION: Request for public comment on electronic submission of responses. confidential. In compliance with these proposed collection of information. Description of the Need for the requirements, NHTSA asks public Information and Proposed Use of the SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can comment on the following proposed Information collect certain information from the collection of information: public, it must receive approval from The National Highway Traffic Safety the Office of Management and Budget Buckle Up America Telephone Surveys Administration (NHTSA) was (OMB). Under new procedures 2002–2004 established to reduce the mounting established by the Paperwork Reduction Type of Request—New information number of deaths, injuries and Act of 1995, before seeking OMB collection requirement. economic losses resulting from motor approval, Federal agencies must solicit OMB Clearance Number—None. vehicle crashes. As part of this statutory public comment on proposed Form Number—This collection of mandate, NHTSA is authorized to collections of information, including information uses no standard forms. conduct research as a foundation for the extensions and reinstatements of Requested Expiration Date of development of motor vehicle standards previously approved collections. Approval—December 31, 2004. and traffic safety programs. This document describes one Summary of the Collection of Wearing a seat belt is the most collection of information for which Information—NHTSA proposes to effective action a person can take to NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. conduct telephone surveys both avert death or injury in the event of a
VerDate 11
motor vehicle crash. Research has found per survey wave. Each survey wave the Office of Management and Budget that lap/shoulder belts reduce the risk of would be comprised of a national (OMB). Under procedures established fatal injury to front-seat passenger car sample, and multiple independent State by the Paperwork Reduction Act of occupants by 45 percent and the risk of samples. The national sample would be 1995, before seeking OMB approval, moderate-to-critical injury by 50 selected from all 50 States plus the Federal agencies must solicit public percent. For light truck occupants, seat District of Columbia. The independent comment on proposed collections of belts reduce the risk of fatal injury by 60 State samples would be composed of information, including extensions and percent and moderate-to-critical injury 500 persons per State. There would be reinstatement of previously approved by 65 percent. an average of 25 independent State collections. This document describes Buckle Up America (BUA) is a samples per survey wave. Together with one collection of information for which Presidential Initiative for increasing seat the national sample, there would be an NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. belt use and child restraint use average of 13,700 interviews per survey This collection is an additional nationwide. National goals are to wave. Interviews would be conducted collection of information for an existing increase seat belt use to 90 percent by with persons at residential phone collection. 2005, and reduce child (0–4 years) numbers selected through random digit DATES: Comments must be received on occupant fatalities by 25 percent (from dialing. Businesses are ineligible for the or before February 19, 2002. the 1995 number) by 2005. The BUA sample and would not be interviewed. ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the strategic plan, developed with input No more than one respondent would be docket notice numbers cited at the from both the public and private sectors, selected per household. Each member of beginning of this notice and be contains four key elements for achieving the sample would complete one submitted to Docket Management, Room the goals: (1) Building public-private interview. No respondent would PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., partnerships; (2) enactment of strong participate in more than one survey Washington, DC 20590. Please identify legislation by States; (3) active, high wave. the proposed collection of information visibility law enforcement; and (4) for which a comment is provided, by effective public education. Guided by Estimate of the Total Annual Reporting referencing its OMB clearance Number. the strategic plan, the BUA Campaign and Record Keeping Burden Resulting It is requested, but not required, that 2 carries out regularly scheduled national From the Collection of Information copies of the comment be provided. The mobilizations that combine high NHTSA estimates that each Docket Section is open on weekdays visibility enforcement with education. respondent in the sample would require The national mobilizations are a an average of 10 minutes to complete from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. major component of the BUA Campaign. the telephone interview. The number of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For As such, there is a need to evaluate their estimated reporting burden hours a year further information, contact Mr. Roger effectiveness. The proposed surveys on the general public (13,700 Kurrus, Office of Planning and would provide pre- and post-test respondents multiplied by one Consumer Programs, 400 Seventh Street, measures for each mobilization interview multiplied by 10 minutes SW., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. conducted during the three year period multiplied by four survey waves) would Kurrus’ telephone number is (202) 366– beginning May 2002. The two measures be 9,133. The respondents would not 2750. His FAX number is (202) 493– would be compared to assess whether incur any reporting cost from the 2290. Please identify the relevant the mobilization activities and messages information collection. The respondents collection of information by referring to penetrated public awareness, whether also would not incur any record keeping its OMB Control Number. the public found the message of burden or record keeping cost from the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the increased enforcement activity credible, information collection. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and whether the mobilization affected before an agency submits a proposed attitudes and (self-reported) behavior Rose A. McMurray, collection of information to OMB for concerning restraint use. Many of the Associate Administrator, Office of Traffic approval, it must first publish a comparisons would need to be made at Safety Programs. document in the Federal Register the State level because of substantial [FR Doc. 01–31109 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] providing a 60-day comment period and differences across States in their BILLING CODE 4910–59–P otherwise consult with members of the mobilization activities (e.g., intensity of public and affected agencies concerning enforcement efforts, use of media, each proposed collection of information. publicized support, etc.). NHTSA would DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The OMB has promulgated regulations select specific States from which to National Highway Traffic Safety describing what must be included in draw independent samples based on Administration such a document. Under OMB’s their planned mobilization activities. regulation (at 5CFR 1320.8(d)), an [U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA–2000– agency must ask for public comment on Description of the Likely Respondents 6887; Notice 2] (Including Estimated Number, and the following: (i) Whether the proposed collection of Proposed Frequency of Response to the Reports, Forms, and Record Keeping information is necessary for the proper Collection of Information) Requirements performance of the functions of the Under this proposed effort, a AGENCY: National Highway Traffic agency, including whether the telephone interview averaging ten Safety Administration (NHTSA), information will have practical utility; minutes in length would be Department of Transportation. (ii) the accuracy of the agency’s administered to randomly selected ACTION: Request for public comment on estimate of the burden of the proposed members of the general public age 16 additional collection of information for collection of information, including the and older in telephone households. an existing collection. validity of the methodology and There would be a total of 12 survey assumptions used; waves conducted over a period of three SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can (iii) how to enhance the quality, years (four per year). An average of collect certain information from the utility, and clarity of the information to 13,700 persons would be interviewed public, it must receive approval from be collected;
VerDate 11
(iv) how to minimize the burden of information, including extensions and comments on the following proposed the collection of information on those reinstatement of previously approved collections of information: who are to respond, including the use collections. Title: Consolidated Vehicle Owner’s of appropriate automated, electronic, This document describes one Manual Requirements for Motor mechanical, or other technological collection of information for which Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Equipment. collection techniques or other forms of NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. Type of Request: Extension of a information technology, e.g. permitting DATES: Comments must be received on currently approved collection. electronic submission of responses. or before February 19, 2002. OMB Control Number: 2127–0541. Affected Public: Individuals, In compliance with these ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the Households, Business, other for-profit, requirements, NHTSA asks for public docket notice numbers cited at the Not-for-profit, Farms, Federal comments on the following proposed beginning of this notice and be Government and State, Local or Tribal collections of information: submitted to Docket Management, Room Government. Title: Tires and Rim Labeling and PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Vehicle Placard Requirements. Abstract: 49 U.S.C. 30117 authorizes Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the Secretary to require that OMB Control Number: 2127–0503. the proposed collection of information Affected Public: Tire and Rim manufacturers provide technical for which a comment is provided, by Manufacturers, Vehicle Manufacturers. information, as for example information Abstract: Each tire manufacturer and referencing its OMB clearance Number. directed for publication in a vehicle rim manufacturer must label their tire It is requested, but not required, that 2 owner’s manual, related to the and rim with the applicable safety copies of the comment be provided. The performance and safety specified in the information. These labeling Docket Section is open on weekdays Federal motor vehicle safety standards requirements ensure that tires are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. for the purposes of educating the mounted on the appropriate rims, that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For consumer and providing safeguards necessary tire recall information is further information, contact Roger Saul, against improper use. Using this readily available, and that the rims and NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room authority, the agency issued the tires are mounted on the vehicles for 5320, NPS–11,Washington, DC 20590. following FMVSS and regulations, which they are intended. Each vehicle Mr. Saul’s telephone number is (202) specifying that certain safety manufacturer must provide labels and 366–1740. Please identify the relevant precautions regarding items of motor placards to ensure that proper load limit collection of information by referring to vehicle equipment appear in the vehicle and tire inflation pressure information its OMB Control Number. owner’s manual to aid the agency in is available. This labeling must be in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the achieving many of its safety goals. accordance with Federal Motor Vehicle Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMVSS No. 108—Lamps, Reflective Safety Standards and regulations. before an agency submits a proposed Devices, and Associated Equipment Estimated Annual Burden: 265,702. collection of information to OMB for Estimated Number of Respondents: approval, it must first publish a This standard requires that certain 7,608. document in the Federal Register lamps and reflective devices with Issued on: December 12, 2001. providing a 60-day comment period and certain performance levels be installed on motor vehicles to assure that the Stephen R. Kratzke, otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning roadway is properly illuminated, that Associate Administrator for Safety vehicles can be readily seen, and the Performance Standards. each proposed collection of information. signals can be transmitted to other [FR Doc. 01–31115 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must be included in drivers sharing the road, during day, BILLING CODE 4910–59–P such a document. Under OMB’s night and inclement weather. Since the regulation (at 5CFR 1320.8(d)), an specific manner in which headlamp aim DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION agency must ask for public comment on is to be performed is not regulated (only the following: the performance of the device is), National Highway Traffic Safety (i) Whether the proposed collection of aiming devices manufactured or Administration information is necessary for the proper installed by different vehicle and performance of the functions of the headlamp manufacturers may work in [Docket No. NHTSA–2001–9477; Notice 2] agency, including whether the significantly different ways. As a consequence, to assure that headlamps Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping information will have practical utility; can be correctly aimed, instructions for Requirements (ii) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed proper use must be part of the vehicle AGENCY: National Highway Traffic collection of information, including the as a label, or optionally, in the vehicle Safety Administration (NHTSA), validity of the methodology and owner’s manual. Department of Transportation. assumptions used; FMVSS 110—Tire Selection and Rims ACTION: Request for public comment on (iii) how to enhance the quality, additional collection of information for utility, and clarity of the information to This standard specifies requirements an existing collection. be collected; for tire selection to prevent tire (iv) how to minimize the burden of overloading. The vehicle’s normal load SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can the collection of information on those and maximum load on the tire shall not collect certain information from the who are to respond, including the use be greater than applicable specified public, it must receive approval from of appropriate automated, electronic, limits. The standard requires a the Office of Management and Budget mechanical, or other technological permanently affixed vehicle placard (OMB). Under procedures established collection techniques or other forms of specifying vehicle capacity weight, by the Paperwork Reduction Act of information technology, e.g. permitting designated seating capacity, 1995, before seeking OMB approval, electronic submission of responses. manufacturer recommended cold tire Federal agencies must solicit public In compliance with these inflation pressure, and manufacturer’s comment on proposed collections of requirements, NHTSA asks for public recommended tire size. The standard
VerDate 11
further specifies rim construction FMVSS No. 213—Child Restraint Collection Request (ICR) abstracted requirements, load limits of non- Systems below has been forwarded to the Office pneumatic spare tires, and labeling This standard specifies requirements of Management and Budget (OMB) for requirements for non-pneumatic spare for child restraint systems and requires review and comment. The ICR describes tires, including a required placard. that manufacturers provide consumers the nature of the information collections Owner’s manual information is required with detailed information relating to and their expected burden. The Federal for ‘‘Use of Spare Tire’’. Revision of child safety in air bag-equipped Register Notice with a 60-day comment FMVSS 110 will require additional vehicles. The vehicle owner’s manual period was published on May 1, 2001 owner’s manual information on the must include information about the [66 FR 21813–21814]. revised vehicle placard and tire operation and do’s and don’ts of built- DATES: Comments must be submitted on information label, on revised tire in child seats. or before January 17, 2002. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: labeling, and on tire safety and load Part 575 Section 103—Camper Loading limits and terminology. Mary Benn at the National Highway This standard requires that Traffic Safety Administration, Office of FMVSS No. 205—Glazing Materials manufacturers of slide-in campers Safety Performance Standards (NPS–20), designed to fit into the cargo bed of This standard specifies requirement 202–366–2264. 400 Seventh Street, SW, pickup trucks affix a label to each Room 5320, Washington, DC 20590. for all glazing material used in camper that contains information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: windshields, windows, and interior relating to certification, identification partitions of motor vehicles. Its purpose and proper loading, and to provide more National Highway Traffic Safety is to reduce the likelihood of lacerations detailed loading information in the Administration and to minimize the possibility of owner’s manual of the truck. Title: Consolidated Justification of occupants penetrating the windshield in Part 575 Section 105—Utility Vehicles Owner’s Manual Requirements for a crash. More detailed information Motor Vehicles and Equipment. regarding the care and maintenance of This regulation requires OMB Number: 2127–0541. such glazing items, as the glass-plastic manufacturers of utility vehicles to alert Type of Request: Extension of a windshield is required to be placed in drivers that the particular handling and currently approved collection. the vehicle owner’s manual. maneuvering characteristics of utility Abstract: 49 U.S.C. 30117 authorizes vehicles require special driving the Secretary to require that FMVSS No. 208—Occupant Crash practices when these vehicles are manufacturers provide technical Protection operated on paved roads. For example, information, as for example information This standard specifies requirements the vehicle owner’s manual is required directed for publication in a vehicle for both active and passive occupant to contain a discussion of vehicle design owner’s manual, related to the features that cause this type of vehicle crash protection systems for passenger performance and safety specified in the to be more likely to roll over, and to cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, Federal motor vehicle safety standards include a discussion of driving practices trucks and small buses. Certain safety for the purposes of educating the that can reduce the risk of roll over. A features, such as air bags, or the care consumer and providing safeguards statement is provided in the regulation against improper use. Using this and maintenance of air bag systems, are that manufacturers shall include, in its required to be explained to the owner by authority, the agency issued the entirety or equivalent form, in the following FMVSS and regulations, means of the owner’s manual. For vehicle owner’s manual. specifying that certain safety example, the owner’s manual must Estimated Annual Burden: 1,771 precautions regarding items of motor describe the vehicle’s air bag system and hours. vehicle equipment appear in the vehicle provide precautionary information Number of Respondents: 25. owner’s manual to aid the agency in about the proper positioning of the Issued on: December 12, 2001. achieving many of its safety goals. occupants, including children. The Stephen R. Kratzke, Affected Public: Individuals, owner’s manual must also warn that no Associate Administrator for Safety households, business, other-for-profit, objects, such as shotguns carried in Performance Standards. not-for-profit, farms, Federal police cars, should be placed over or [FR Doc. 01–31116 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Government and State, Local, or Tribal near the air bag covers. BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Government. FMVSS No. 210–Seat Belt Assembly Estimated Total Annual Burden: Anchorages 1371. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 This standard specifies requirements days, to the Office of Information and for seat belt assembly anchorages to National Highway Traffic Safety Regulatory Affairs, Office of ensure effective occupant restraint and Administration Management and Budget, 725–17th to reduce the likelihood of failure in a Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Reports, Forms and Record Keeping crash. The standard requires that Attention NHTSA Desk Officer. Requirements; Agency Information manufacturers place the following Comments are invited on: Whether Collection Activity Under OMB Review information in the vehicle owner’s the proposed collection of information manual: AGENCY: National Highway Traffic is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, a. an explanation that child restraints Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice. including whether the information will are designed to be secured by means of have practical utility; the accuracy of the vehicle’s seat belts, and, SUMMARY: In compliance with the the Departments estimate of the burden b. a statement alerting vehicle owners Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 of the proposed information collection; that children are always safer in the rear U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice ways to enhance the quality, utility and seat. announces that the Information clarity of the information to be
VerDate 11
collected; and ways to minimize the Form Number: Form 1065–B and DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY burden of the collection of information Schedule K–1. on respondents, including the use of Abstract: Internal Revenue Code Internal Revenue Service automated collection techniques or Section 6031 and Regulation section other forms of information technology. 1.6031–1 requires partnerships to file a Proposed Collection; Comment A Comment to OMB is most effective return. Internal Revenue Code sections Request for Revenue Procedure 2001– if OMB receives it within 30 days of 771–777, enacted by the Taxpayer Relief 56 publication. Act of 1997, allow large partnerships to AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Issued in Washington, DC, on December 3, elect to file a simplified return which Treasury. requires fewer items to be reported to 2001. ACTION: Notice and request for Delmas Johnson, partners. Form 1065–B is used for this purpose. comments. Acting Associate Administrator for Current Actions: There are no changes Administration. SUMMARY: The Department of the being made to the form at this time. Treasury, as part of its continuing effort [FR Doc. 01–31114 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Type of Review: Extension of a BILLING CODE 4910–59–P to reduce paperwork and respondent currently approved collection. burden, invites the general public and Affected Public: Business or other for- other Federal agencies to take this profit organizations and farms. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Estimated Number of Respondents: opportunity to comment on proposed 100. and/or continuing information Internal Revenue Service Estimated Time Per Respondent: collections, as required by the Varies. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Proposed Collection; Comment Estimated Total Annual Burden Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. Request for Form 1065–B and Hours: 456,109. 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is Schedule K–1 The following paragraph applies to all soliciting comments concerning of the collections of information covered Revenue Procedure 2001–56, AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), by this notice: Demonstration Automobile Use. Treasury. An agency may not conduct or DATES: Written comments should be ACTION: Notice and request for sponsor, and a person is not required to received on or before February 19, 2002 comments. respond to, a collection of information to be assured of consideration. unless the collection of information SUMMARY: The Department of the ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments Treasury, as part of its continuing effort displays a valid OMB control number. to George Freeland, Internal Revenue Books or records relating to a collection to reduce paperwork and respondent Service, room 5577, 1111 Constitution of information must be retained as long burden, invites the general public and Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. as their contents may become material other Federal agencies to take this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: in the administration of any internal opportunity to comment on proposed Requests for additional information or revenue law. Generally, tax returns and and/or continuing information copies of the revenue procedure should tax return information are confidential, collections, as required by the be directed to Carol Savage, (202) 622– as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 3945, Internal Revenue Service, room Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C. Request for Comments 5242, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., 3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the IRS is Comments submitted in response to Washington, DC 20224. soliciting comments concerning Form this notice will be summarized and/or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1065–B, U.S. Return of Income for included in the request for OMB Title: Demonstration Automobile Use. Electing Large Partnerships, and approval. All comments will become a OMB Number: 1545–1756. Schedule K–1, Partner’s Share of matter of public record. Comments are Revenue Procedure Number: Revenue Income (Loss) From an Electing Large invited on: (a) Whether the collection of Procedure 2001–56. Partnership. information is necessary for the proper Abstract: Revenue Procedure 2001–56 DATES: Written comments should be performance of the functions of the provides optional simplified methods received on or before February 19, 2002 agency, including whether the for determining the value of the use of to be assured of consideration. information shall have practical utility; demonstration automobiles provided to employees by automobile dealerships. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Current Actions: There are no changes to George Freeland, Internal Revenue of the burden of the collection of being made to this revenue procedure at Service, room 5577, 1111 Constitution information; (c) ways to enhance the this time. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to Type of Review: Extension of a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: minimize the burden of the collection of currently approved collection. Requests for additional information or information on respondents, including Affected Public: Business or other for- copies of the form(s) and instructions through the use of automated collection profit organizations. should be directed to Carol Savage, techniques or other forms of information Estimated Number of Respondents: (202) 622–3945, Internal Revenue technology; and (e) estimates of capital 20,000. Service, room 5242, 1111 Constitution or start-up costs and costs of operation, Estimated Time Per Respondent: 5 Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. maintenance, and purchase of services hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to provide information. Estimated Total Annual Burden Title: Form 1065–B, U.S. Return of Hours: 100,000. Income for Electing Large Partnerships, Approved: December 13, 2001. The following paragraph applies to all and Schedule K–1, Partner’s Share of George Freeland, of the collections of information covered Income (Loss) From an Electing Large IRS Reports Clearance Officer. by this notice: Partnership. [FR Doc. 01–31158 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] An agency may not conduct or OMB Number: 1545–1626. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P sponsor, and a person is not required to
VerDate 11
respond to, a collection of information included in the request for OMB minimize the burden of the collection of unless the collection of information approval. All comments will become a information on respondents, including displays a valid OMB control number. matter of public record. Comments are through the use of automated collection Books or records relating to a collection invited on: (a) Whether the collection of techniques or other forms of information of information must be retained as long information is necessary for the proper technology; and (e) estimates of capital as their contents may become material performance of the functions of the or start-up costs and costs of operation, in the administration of any internal agency, including whether the maintenance, and purchase of services revenue law. Generally, tax returns and information shall have practical utility; to provide information. tax return information are confidential, (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Approved: December 12, 2001. as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103. of the burden of the collection of George Freeland, Request for Comments information; (c) ways to enhance the IRS Reports Clearance Officer. Comments submitted in response to quality, utility, and clarity of the [FR Doc. 01–31159 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] this notice will be summarized and/or information to be collected; (d) ways to BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
VerDate 11
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Parts 9, 122, et al. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: Regulations Addressing Cooling Water Intake Structures for New Facilities; Final Rule
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION water systems or impingement against purposes, the permit authority will AGENCY screens or other devices at the entrance implement section 316(b) on a case-by- of cooling water intake structures. case basis, using best professional 40 CFR Parts 9, 122, 123, 124, and 125 Benefits may also accrue at population, judgment. This final rule defines the [FRL–7105–4] community, or ecosystem levels of term ‘‘cooling water intake structure’’ to ecological structures. The preamble mean the total physical structure and RIN 2040–AC34 discusses these benefits to the extent any associated constructed waterways possible in qualitative terms. used to withdraw water from a water of National Pollutant Discharge DATES: This regulation shall become the U.S. The cooling water intake Elimination System: Regulations effective January 17, 2002. For judicial structure extends from the point at Addressing Cooling Water Intake review purposes, this final rule is which water is withdrawn from the Structures for New Facilities promulgated as of 1:00 p.m. Eastern surface water source up to and AGENCY: Environmental Protection Standard Time (EST) on January 2, including the intake pumps. Today’s Agency (EPA). 2002, as provided in 40 CFR 23.2. rule does not apply to existing facilities including major modifications to ACTION: Final rule. ADDRESSES: The public record for this rule is established under docket number existing facilities that would be ‘‘new SUMMARY: Today’s final rule implements W–00–03. Copies of comments received, sources’’ in 40 CFR 122.29 as that term section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act EPA responses, and all other supporting is used in the effluent guidelines and (CWA) for new facilities that use water documents (except for information standards program. Although EPA has withdrawn from rivers, streams, lakes, claimed as Confidential Business not finished examining the costs of reservoirs, estuaries, oceans or other Information (CBI)) are available for technology options at existing facilities, waters of the United States (U.S.) for review in the EPA Water Docket, East the Agency anticipates that existing cooling purposes. The final rule Tower Basement, Room EB–57, 401 M facilities would have less flexibility in establishes national technology-based Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. The designing and locating their cooling performance requirements applicable to record is available for inspection from water intake structures than new the location, design, construction, and 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through facilities and that existing facilities capacity of cooling water intake Friday, excluding legal holidays. For might incur higher compliance costs structures at new facilities. The national access to the docket materials, please than new facilities. For example, requirements establish the best call (202) 260–3027 to schedule an existing facilities might need to upgrade technology available, based on a two- appointment. or modify existing intake structures and track approach, for minimizing adverse FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For cooling water systems to meet environmental impact associated with additional technical information contact requirements of the type contained in the use of these structures. Deborah G. Nagle at (202) 260–2656. For today’s rule, which might impose Based on size, Track I establishes additional biological information greater costs than use of the same national intake capacity and velocity contact Debbi Hart at (202) 260–0905. technologies at a new facility. requirements as well as location- and For additional economic information Retrofitting technologies at an existing capacity-based requirements to reduce contact Ghulam Ali at (202) 260–9886. facility might also require shutdown intake flow below certain proportions of The e-mail address for the above periods during which the facility would certain waterbodies (referred to as contacts is [email protected]. lose both production and revenues, and ‘‘proportional-flow requirements’’). It SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: certain retrofits could decrease the also requires the permit applicant to thermal efficiency of an electric select and implement design and What Entities Are Regulated by This generating facility. Site limitations, such construction technologies under certain Action? as lack of undeveloped space, might conditions to minimize impingement This final rule applies to new make certain technologies infeasible at mortality and entrainment. Track II greenfield (defined by example in existing facilities. Accordingly, EPA allows permit applicants to conduct section I. of this preamble) and stand does not intend that today’s rule or site-specific studies to demonstrate to alone facilities that use cooling water preamble serve as guidance for the Director that alternatives to the intake structures to withdraw water developing section 316(b) requirements Track I requirements will reduce from waters of the U.S. and that have or for existing facilities. Permit writers impingement mortality and entrainment require a National Pollutant Discharge should continue to apply best for all life stages of fish and shellfish to Elimination System (NPDES) permit professional judgment in making case- a level of reduction comparable to the issued under section 402 of the CWA. by-case section 316(b) determinations level the facility would achieve at the New facilities subject to this regulation for existing facilities, based on existing cooling water intake structure if it met include those that have a design intake guidance and other legal authorities. the Track I requirements. flow of greater than two (2) million EPA will address existing facilities fully EPA expects that this final regulation gallons per day (MGD) and that use at in Phase II and Phase III rulemakings. will reduce impingement and least twenty-five (25) percent of water The following table lists the types of entrainment at new facilities. Today’s withdrawn for cooling purposes. entities that EPA believes are potentially final rule establishes requirements that Generally, facilities that meet these subject to this final rule. This table is will help preserve aquatic organisms criteria fall into two major groups: new not intended to be exhaustive; rather, it and the ecosystems they inhabit in steam electric generating facilities and provides a guide for readers regarding waters used by cooling water intake new manufacturing facilities. If a new entities likely to be regulated by this structures at new facilities. EPA has facility meets these conditions, it is action. Other types of entities not listed considered the potential benefits of the subject to today’s final regulations. If a in the table could also be regulated. To rule; these include a decrease in new facility has or requires an NPDES determine whether your facility is expected mortality or injury to aquatic permit but does not meet the two MGD regulated by this action, you should organisms that would otherwise be intake flow threshold or uses less than carefully examine the applicability subject to entrainment into cooling 25 percent of its water for cooling water criteria at § 125.81 of the rule. If you
VerDate 11
have questions regarding the persons listed in the preceding FOR applicability of this action to a FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. particular entity, consult one of the
Standard Industrial Classification North American Industry Classifica- Category Examples of regulated entities (SIC) Codes tion System (NAICS) Codes
Federal, State and Local Operators of steam electric gener- 4911 and 493 ...... 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, Government. ating point source dischargers that 221121, 221122, 221111, 221112, employ cooling water intake struc- 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122. tures. Industry ...... Operators of industrial point source See below ...... See below. dischargers that employ cooling water intake structures. Steam electric generating ...... 4911 and 493 ...... 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122, 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122. Agricultural production ...... 0133 ...... 111991, 11193. Metal mining ...... 1011 ...... 21221. Oil and gas extraction (excluding off- 1311, 1321 ...... 211111, 211112. shore and coastal subcategories). Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic 1474 ...... 212391. minerals. Food and kindred products ...... 2046, 2061, 2062, 2063, 2075, 2085 311221, 311311, 311312, 311313, 311222, 311225, 31214. Tobacco products ...... 2141 ...... 312229, 31221. Textile mill products ...... 2211, 2261 ...... 31321. Lumber and wood products, except 2415, 2421, 2436, 2493 ...... 321912, 321113, 321918, 321999, furniture. 321212, 321219. Paper and allied products ...... 2611, 2621, 2631, 2676, 2679 ...... 3221, 322121, 32213, 322121, 322122, 32213, 322291. Chemical and allied products ...... 28 (except 2822, 2835, 2836, 2842, 325 (except 325182, 32591, 32551, 2843, 2844, 2861, 2895, 2893, 32532). 2851, and 2879). Petroleum refining and related indus- 2911, 2999 ...... 32411, 324199. tries. Rubber and miscellaneous plastics 3011, 3069 ...... 326211, 31332, 326192, 326299. products. Stone, clay, glass, and concrete 3241 ...... 32731. products. Primary metal industries ...... 3312, 3313, 3315, 3316, 3317, 3334, 324199, 331111, 331112, 331492, 3339, 3353, 3357. 331222, 332618, 331221, 22121, 331312, 331419, 331315, 331521, 331524, 331525. Fabricated metal products, except 3421, 3499 ...... 332211, 337215, 332117, 332439, machinery and transportation 33251, 332919, 339914, 332999. equipment. Industrial and commercial machinery 3523, 3531 ...... 333111, 332323, 332212, 333922, and computer equipment. 22651, 333923, 33312. Transportation equipment ...... 3724, 3743, 3764 ...... 336412, 333911, 33651, 336416. Measuring, analyzing, and controlling 3861 ...... 333315, 325992. instruments; photographic, med- ical, and optical goods; watches and clocks. Electric, gas, and sanitary services .. 4911, 4931, 4939, 4961 ...... 221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122, 22121, 22133. Educational services ...... 8221 ...... 61131. Engineering, Accounting, Research, 8731 ...... 54171. Management, and Related Serv- ices.
Supporting Documentation document provides an assessment of may be used to meet the rule’s potential benefits. requirements. The final regulation is supported by two major documents: 2. Technical Development Document How To Obtain Supporting Documents 1. Economic Analysis of the Final for the Final Regulations Addressing Regulations Addressing Cooling Water Cooling Water Intake Structures for New You can obtain the Economic Intake Structures for New Facilities Facilities (EPA–821–R–01–036), Analysis and Technical Development (EPA–821–R–01–035), hereafter referred hereafter referred to as the Technical Document from the Agency’s 316(b) to as the Economic Analysis. This Development Document. This document website (http://www.epa.gov/ost/316b). document presents the analysis of presents detailed information on the The documents are also available from compliance costs, barrier to entry, and methods used to develop unit costs and the National Service Center for energy supply effects. In addition, the describes the set of technologies that Environmental Publications, P.O. Box
VerDate 11
42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242–2419; G. Are Permits for New Facilities Subject facility that meets all of the following telephone (800) 490–9198 and the Water to Requirements Under Other Federal criteria: Resource Center , U.S. EPA, 1200 Statutes? • Your greenfield or stand alone H. Alternative Requirements facility meets the definition of new Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. (RC 4100), VIII. Economic Analysis Washington D.C. 20460 (202) 260–2814. A. Electric Generation Sector facility specified in § 125.83 of this rule; • Your new facility uses a newly Organization of This Document B. Manufacturing Sector C. Economic Impacts constructed or modified existing cooling I. Scope of This Rulemaking D. Cost and Economic Impacts of Other water intake structure or structures, or A. What Is a New Facility? Alternatives your facility obtains cooling water by B. What Is a Cooling Water Intake IX. Potential Benefits Associated With any sort of contract or arrangement with Structure? Reducing Impingement and Entrainment an independent supplier who has a C. What Cooling Water Use and Design X. Regulatory Requirements cooling water intake structure; Intake Flow Thresholds Result in a New A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory • Your new facility’s cooling water Facility Being Subject to This Final Planning and Review intake structure(s) withdraw(s) water B. Paperwork Reduction Act Rule? from waters of the U.S. and at least D. Does This Rule Apply to My Facility If C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as twenty-five (25) percent of the water It Does Not Have a Point Source withdrawn is used for contact or Discharge Subject to an NPDES Permit? Amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of noncontact cooling purposes; E. What Requirements Must I Meet Under 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. • Your new facility has a design the Final Rule? E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism II. Legal Authority, Purpose and Background intake flow of greater than two (2) F. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions million gallons per day (MGD); and of Today’s Regulation To Address Environmental Justice in • A. Legal Authority Your new facility has an NPDES Minority Populations and Low-Income permit or is required to obtain one. B. Purpose of Today’s Regulation Populations C. Background G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of If a new facility meets these III. Environmental Impact Associated With Children From Environmental Health conditions, it is subject to today’s final Cooling Water Intake Structures Risks and Safety Risks regulations. If a new facility has or IV. Summary of the Most Significant H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation requires an NPDES permit but does not Revisions to the Proposed Rule and Coordination With Indian Tribal meet the two MGD intake flow A. Data Updates Governments threshold or the twenty-five percent B. Regulatory Approach I. Executive Order 13158: Marine Protected cooling water use threshold, it is not V. Basis for the Final Regulation Areas subject to permit conditions based on A. Major Options Considered for the Final J. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects) Rule K. National Technology Transfer and today’s rule; rather, it is subject to B. Why EPA Is Establishing EPA’s Advancement Act permit conditions implementing section Preferred Two-Track Option as the Best L. Plain Language Directive 316(b) of the CWA set by the permit Technology Available for Minimizing M. Congressional Review Act director on a case-by-case basis, using Adverse Environmental Impact? best professional judgment. C. Why EPA Is Not Adopting Dry Cooling I. Scope of This Rulemaking as the Best Technology Available for Today’s final rule establishes A. What Is a New Facility? Minimizing Adverse Environmental technology-based performance A new facility subject to this Impact? requirements applicable to the location, regulation is any facility that meets the D. Why EPA Is Not Accepting the Industry design, construction, and capacity of definition of ‘‘new source’’ or ‘‘new Two-Track Approach in Full cooling water intake structures at new discharger’’ in 40 CFR 122.2 and VI. Summary of Major Comments on the facilities under section 316(b) of the 122.29(b)(1), (2), and (4); commences Proposed Rule and Notice of Data Availability (NODA) Clean Water Act. The rule establishes construction after January 17, 2002; and A. Scope/Applicability the best technology available for uses either a newly constructed cooling B. Environmental Impact Associated With minimizing adverse environmental water intake structure, or an existing Cooling Water Intake Structures impact associated with the use of these cooling water intake structure whose C. Location structures. Today’s final rule also design capacity is increased; or obtains D. Flow and Volume partially fulfills EPA’s obligation to cooling water by any sort of contract or E. Velocity comply with a consent decree entered in arrangement with an independent F. Dry Cooling the United States District Court, supplier who has a cooling water intake G. Implementation-Baseline Biological Southern District of New York in structure. The term ‘‘commence Characterization Riverkeeper Inc., et al. v. Whitman, No. construction’’ is defined in 40 CFR H. Cost I. Benefits 93 Civ. 0314 (AGS). (For a more detailed 122.29(b)(4). J. Engineering and Economic Analysis discussion of the consent decree, see As stated above, this rule applies to Limitations II.C.2). only ‘‘greenfield’’ and ‘‘stand-alone’’ K. EPA Authority This final rule applies to new facilities. A greenfield facility is a L. Restoration greenfield or stand alone facilities: (1) facility that is constructed at a site at VII. Implementation that use a newly constructed cooling which no other source is located, or that A. When Does the Rule Become Effective? water intake structure, or a modified totally replaces the process or B. What Information Must I Submit to the existing cooling water intake structure production equipment at an existing Director When I Apply for My New or whose design capacity is increased that facility (see 40 CFR 122.29(b)(1)(i) and Reissued NPDES Permit? withdraws water from waters of the (ii)). A stand-alone facility is a new, C. How Will the Director Determine the U.S.; and (2) that has or is required to separate facility that is constructed on Appropriate Cooling Water Intake Structure Requirements? have a National Pollutant Discharge property where an existing facility is D. What Will I Be Required to Monitor? Elimination System (NPDES) permit located and whose processes are E. How Will Compliance Be Determined? issued under section 402 of the CWA. substantially independent of the F. What Are the Respective Federal, State, Specifically, the rule applies to you if existing facility at the same site (see 40 and Tribal Roles? you are the owner or operator of a CFR 122.29(b)(1)(iii)). An example of
VerDate 11
total replacement is as follows: The to the cooling water intake structure, 122.2, which can include lakes, ponds, power plant or manufacturer including the pumps, that increases reservoirs, nontidal rivers or streams, demolishes the power plant or design capacity to any extent, then the tidal rivers, estuaries, fjords, oceans, manufacturing facility and builds a new cooling water intake structure has been bays, and coves. plant or facility in its place. The pumps modified; use of this structure by a Some commenters questioned of the existing cooling water intake greenfield or stand-alone facility would whether the discussion of cooling ponds structure are replaced with new pumps make the facility a new facility subject in the preamble to the proposal (65 FR that increase design capacity to to this rule. 49067, col. 2) meant that EPA considers accommodate additional cooling water B. What Is a Cooling Water Intake cooling ponds to be ‘‘waters of the needs, but the intake pipe is left in Structure? United States.’’ EPA did not intend that place. In this situation, the facility discussion to change the regulatory would be a new facility. Modifications For the purposes of this rule a status of cooling ponds. Cooling ponds to an existing cooling water intake ‘‘cooling water intake structure’’ is are neither categorically included nor structure that do not serve the cooling defined as the total physical structure categorically excluded from the water needs of a greenfield or stand- and any associated constructed definition of ‘‘waters of the United alone facility in 40 CFR 122.2 and waterways used to withdraw water from States’’ at 40 CFR 122.2. EPA interprets 122.29(b)(1), (2), and (4) (i.e., a facility waters of the U.S. The cooling water 40 CFR 122.2 to give permit writers that meets the definition of new source intake structure extends from the point discretion to regulate cooling ponds as or new discharger and commences at which water is withdrawn from ‘‘waters of the United States’’ where construction after the effective date of waters of the U.S. up to and including cooling ponds meet the definition of the rule) do not constitute a new facility the intake pumps. EPA has defined ‘‘waters of the United States.’’ The ‘‘cooling water’’ as water used for subject to this rule. Thus, the definition determination whether a particular contact or noncontact cooling, including of new facility under this rule is cooling pond is or is not ‘‘waters of the water used for equipment cooling, narrower than the definition of new United States’’ is to be made by the evaporative cooling tower makeup, and source under section 306 of the CWA. permit writer on a case-by-case basis, dilution of effluent heat content. The informed by the principles enunciated The definition of new facility also Agency has specified that the intended in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook requires that the greenfield or stand- use of cooling water is to absorb waste County v. US Army Corps of Engineers, alone facility use ‘‘a newly constructed heat from production processes or 531 U.S. 159 (2001). cooling water intake structure or an auxiliary operations. In addition, for the existing cooling water intake structure final rule EPA has amended the D. Does This Rule Apply to My Facility whose design capacity is increased to definition of cooling water to ensure If It Does Not Have a Point Source accommodate the intake of additional that the rule does not discourage the Discharge Subject to an NPDES Permit? cooling water.’’ This means a facility reuse of cooling water as process water. that would otherwise be a ‘‘new As such, heated cooling water that is Today’s final rule applies only to new facility’’ would not be treated as a new subsequently used in a manufacturing facilities as defined in § 125.83 that facility under this rule if it withdraws process is considered process water for have an NPDES permit or are required water from an existing cooling water the purposes of calculating the to obtain one because they discharge or intake structure whose design capacity percentage of a new facility’s intake might discharge pollutants, including has not been increased to accommodate flow that is used for cooling purposes. storm water, from a point source to the intake of additional cooling water. waters of the United States. Routine maintenance and repair, such C. What Cooling Water Use and Design Requirements for minimizing the as replacement of pumps that does not Intake Flow Thresholds Result in a New adverse environmental impact of increase the capacity of the structure, Facility Being Subject to This Final cooling water intake structures will cleaning in response to biofouling, and Rule? continue to be applied through NPDES repair or replacement of moving parts at This rule applies to new facilities that permits. a cooling water intake that is part of a (1) withdraw cooling water from waters E. What Requirements Must I Meet greenfield or stand-alone facility, and of the U.S. and use at least twenty-five Under the Final Rule? that occur simply for operation and (25) percent of the water withdrawn for maintenance purposes, would not be a cooling purposes and (2) have a cooling Today’s final rule establishes a two- modification of that intake structure. water intake structure with a design track approach for regulating cooling One way to distinguish whether intake capacity of greater than or equal water intake structures at new facilities. replacement of the pipes or the pumps to two (2) million gallons per day (MGD) Track I establishes uniform is for maintenance and repair purposes of source water. See 40 CFR 125.81 of requirements based on facility cooling or whether it is to accommodate this rule. The percentage of total water water intake capacity. Track II provides construction of a new facility is to withdrawn that is used for cooling dischargers with the opportunity to determine whether the replacement purposes is to be measured on an establish that alternative requirements increases the original design capacity. average monthly basis over a period of will achieve comparable performance. Today’s rule specifies that changes to a one year. See 40 CFR 125.81(c) of this The regulated entity has the opportunity cooling water intake structure are rule. A new facility meets the 25 percent to choose which track it will follow. The considered modifications for purposes cooling water use threshold if, on the Track I and Track II requirements are of this rule only if such changes result basis of the new facility’s design when summarized below. in an increase in design capacity. Thus, measured over a period of one year, any Under Track I, new facilities with a routine maintenance or repair of the monthly average percentage of cooling design intake flow equal to or greater cooling water intake structure, water withdrawn is expected to equal or than 10 MGD, must meet the following including the pumps, that does not exceed 25 percent of the total water requirements: result in an increase in design capacity withdrawn. Waters of the U.S. include (1) Cooling water intake flow must be does not modify a cooling water intake the broad range of surface waters that at a level commensurate with that structure. However, if a change is made meet the regulatory definition at 40 CFR achievable with a closed-cycle,
VerDate 11
recirculating cooling system; (40 CFR (1) Employ technologies that will facilities that withdraw at least two (2) 125.84(b)(1)) reduce the level of adverse million gallons per day (MGD) and use (2) Through-screen intake velocity environmental impact to a comparable at least twenty-five (25) percent of the must be less than or equal to 0.5 feet per level to that which would be achieved water they withdraw for cooling second; (40 CFR 125.84(b)(2)) under the Track I requirements (as purposes. Today’s final rule establishes (3) Location- and capacity-based demonstrated in a Comprehensive best technology available for limits on proportional intake flow must Demonstration Study); (40 CFR minimizing adverse environmental be met (for fresh water rivers or streams, 125.84(d)(1)) impact associated with the intake of intake flow must be less than or equal (2) The same proportional intake flow water from waters of the U.S. at these to 5 percent of the mean annual flow; limitations as in Track I, based on the structures. See part III for further for lakes or reservoirs, intake flow may intake source water, must be met; (40 discussion of the environmental impact not disrupt natural thermal stratification CFR 125.84(d)(2)). associated with cooling water intake or turnover pattern (where present) of Section IV.B and V. of this preamble structures. provides a more detailed discussion of the source water except in cases where C. Background the disruption is determined to be the requirements included under this beneficial to the management of two-track approach. The two-track 1. The Clean Water Act fisheries for fish and shellfish by any approach provides new facilities with a The Federal Water Pollution Control fishery management agency(ies); for well-defined set of requirements that Act, also known as the Clean Water Act estuaries or tidal rivers, intake flow constitute best technology available (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., seeks to must be less than or equal to 1 percent (BTA) for minimizing adverse ‘‘restore and maintain the chemical, of the tidal excursion volume; for environmental impact and can be physical, and biological integrity of the oceans, there are no proportional flow implemented relatively quickly. This nation’s waters.’’ 33 U.S.C. 1251(a). The requirements); (40 CFR 125.84(b)(3)) approach also provides flexibility to CWA establishes a comprehensive and operators who believe alternative or regulatory program, key elements of (4) Design and construction emerging technologies would be just as which are (1) a prohibition on the technologies for minimizing effective at reducing impingement and discharge of pollutants from point impingement mortality and entrainment entrainment. sources to waters of the U.S., except as must be selected and implemented if II. Legal Authority, Purpose and authorized by the statute; (2) authority certain conditions exist where the Background of Today’s Regulation for EPA or authorized States or Tribes cooling water intake structure is located. to issue National Pollutant Discharge (40 CFR 125.84(b)(4) and (5)) A. Legal Authority Elimination System (NPDES) permits Under Track I, new facilities with a Today’s final rule is issued under the that regulate the discharge of pollutants; design intake flow equal to or greater authority of sections 101, 301, 304, 306, and (3) requirements for EPA to develop than 2 MGD, but less than 10 MGD, 308, 316, 401, 402, 501, and 510 of the effluent limitation guidelines and must meet the following requirements: Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1251, standards and for States to develop (1) Through-screen intake velocity 1311, 1314, 1316, 1318, 1326, 1341, water quality standards that are the must be less than or equal to 0.5 feet per 1342, 1361, and 1370. This rule partially basis for the limitations required in second; (40 CFR 125.84(c)(1)) fulfills the obligations of the U.S. NPDES permits. (2) Location- and capacity-based Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Today’s final rule implements section limits on proportional intake flow must under a consent decree in Riverkeeper 316(b) of the CWA as it applies to ‘‘new be met (for fresh water rivers or streams, Inc., et al. v. Whitman, United States facilities’’ as defined in this rule. 316(b) intake flow must be less than or equal District Court, Southern District of New addresses the adverse environmental to 5 percent of the mean annual flow; York, No. 93 Civ. 0314 (AGS). impact caused by the intake of cooling for lakes or reservoirs, intake flow may water, not discharges into water. Despite not disrupt natural thermal stratification B. Purpose of Today’s Regulation this special focus, the requirements of or turnover pattern (where present) of Section 316(b) of the CWA provides section 316(b) are closely linked to the source water except in cases where that any standard established pursuant several of the core elements of the the disruption is determined to be to section 301 or 306 of the CWA and NPDES permit program established beneficial to the management of applicable to a point source must under section 402 of the CWA to control fisheries for fish and shellfish by any require that the location, design, discharges of pollutants into navigable fishery management agency(ies); for construction, and capacity of cooling waters. For example, section 316(b) estuaries or tidal rivers, intake flow water intake structures reflect the best applies to facilities that withdraw water must be less than or equal to 1 percent technology available (BTA) for from the waters of the United States for of the tidal excursion volume; for minimizing adverse environmental cooling through a cooling water intake oceans, there are no proportional flow impact. Today’s final rule defines a structure and are point sources subject requirements); (40 CFR 125.84(c)(2)) and cooling water intake structure as the to an NPDES permit. Conditions (3) Design and construction total physical structure, including the implementing section 316(b) are technologies for minimizing pumps, and any associated constructed included in NPDES permits and will impingement mortality must be selected waterways used to withdraw water from continue to be included in NPDES if certain conditions exist where the waters of the U.S. Cooling water absorbs permits under this final rule. cooling water intake structure is located waste heat from processes employed or Section 301 of the CWA prohibits the 125.84(c)(3); and design and from auxiliary operations on a facility’s discharge of any pollutant by any construction technologies for premises. Single cooling water intake person, except in compliance with minimizing entrainment must be structures might have multiple intake specified statutory requirements. These selected and implemented. (40 CFR bays. Today’s final rule establishes requirements include compliance with 125.84(c)(4)) requirements applicable to the location, technology-based effluent limitation Under Track II, new facilities must design, construction, and capacity of guidelines and new source performance meet the following requirements: cooling water intake structures at new standards, water quality standards,
VerDate 11
NPDES permit requirements, and manufacturing, pulp and paper regulations for, at a minimum, smaller- certain other requirements. manufacturing, petroleum refining, flow power plants and factories in four Section 402 of the CWA provides chemical manufacturing). industrial sectors (pulp and paper authority for EPA or an authorized State Section 306 of the CWA requires that making, petroleum and coal products or Tribe to issue an NPDES permit to EPA establish discharge standards for manufacturing, chemical and allied any person discharging any pollutant or new sources. For purposes of section manufacturing, and primary metal combination of pollutants from a point 306, new sources include any source manufacturing) by June 15, 2003. source into waters of the U.S. Forty-four that commenced construction after the States and one U.S. territory are promulgation of applicable new source 3. What Prior EPA Rulemakings authorized under section 402(b) to performance standards, or after proposal Addressed Cooling Water Intake administer the NPDES permitting of applicable standards of performance Structures? program. NPDES permits restrict the if the standards are promulgated in types and amounts of pollutants, accordance with section 306 within 120 In April 1976 EPA published a rule including heat, that may be discharged days of proposal. CWA section 306; 40 under section 316(b) that addressed from various industrial, commercial, CFR 122.2. New source performance cooling water intake structures. 41 FR and other sources of wastewater. These standards are similar to the technology- 17387 (April 26, 1976), proposed at 38 permits control the discharge of based limitations established for FR 34410 (December 13, 1973). The rule pollutants primarily by requiring existing sources, except that new source added a new § 401.14 to 40 CFR Chapter dischargers to meet effluent limitations performance standards are based on the I that reiterated the requirements of and other permit conditions. Effluent best available demonstrated technology CWA section 316(b). It also added a new limitations may be based on instead of the best available technology part 402, which included three sections: promulgated federal effluent limitation economically achievable. New facilities (1) § 402.10 (Applicability), (2) § 402.11 guidelines, new source performance have the opportunity to install the best (Specialized definitions), and (3) standards, or the best professional and most efficient production processes § 402.12 (Best technology available for judgment of the permit writer. and wastewater treatment technologies. cooling water intake structures). Section Limitations based on these guidelines, Therefore, Congress directed EPA to 402.10 stated that the provisions of part standards, or best professional judgment consider the best demonstrated process 402 applied to ‘‘cooling water intake are known as technology-based effluent changes, in-plant controls, and end-of- structures for point sources for which limits. Where technology-based effluent process control and treatment effluent limitations are established limits are inadequate to ensure technologies that reduce pollution to the pursuant to section 301 or standards of compliance with water quality maximum extent feasible. In addition, performance are established pursuant to standards applicable to the receiving in establishing new source performance water, more stringent effluent limits standards, EPA is required to take into section 306 of the Act.’’ Section 402.11 based on applicable water quality consideration the cost of achieving the defined the terms ‘‘cooling water intake standards are required. NPDES permits effluent reduction and any non-water structure,’’ ‘‘location,’’ ‘‘design,’’ also routinely include monitoring and quality environmental impacts and ‘‘construction,’’ ‘‘capacity,’’ and reporting requirements, standard energy requirements. As stated above, a ‘‘Development Document.’’ Section conditions, and special conditions. ‘‘new source’’ under CWA section 306 402.12 included the following language: Sections 301, 304, and 306 of the applies to a broader set of facilities than The information contained in the CWA require that EPA develop the group of facilities subject to this Development Document shall be technology-based effluent limitation rule. considered in determining whether the guidelines and new source performance location, design, construction, and standards that are used as the basis for 2. Consent Decree technology-based minimum discharge Today’s final rule partially fulfills capacity of a cooling water intake requirements in wastewater discharge EPA’s obligation to comply with an structure of a point source subject to permits. EPA issues these effluent amended Consent Decree entered in the standards established under section 301 limitation guidelines and standards for United States District Court, Southern or 306 reflect the best technology categories of industrial dischargers District of New York, in Riverkeeper available for minimizing adverse based on the pollutants of concern Inc., et al. v. Whitman, No. 93 Civ 0314 environmental impact. discharged by the industry, the degree (AGS), a case brought against EPA by a In 1977, fifty-eight electric utility of control that can be attained using coalition of individuals and companies challenged these regulations, environmental groups. The consent various levels of pollution control arguing that EPA had failed to comply decree as entered on October 10, 1995, technology, consideration of various with the requirements of the provided that EPA propose regulations economic tests appropriate to each level Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in of control, and other factors identified implementing section 316(b) by July 2, promulgating the rule. Specifically, the in sections 304 and 306 of the CWA 1999, and take final action with respect utilities argued that EPA had neither (such as non-water quality to those regulation by August 13, 2001. environmental impacts including energy Under subsequent orders and an published the development document impacts). EPA has promulgated amended consent decree, EPA has in the Federal Register nor properly regulations setting effluent limitation divided the rulemaking into three incorporated the document into the rule guidelines and standards under sections phases and is working under new by reference. The United States Court of 301, 304, and 306 of the CWA for more deadlines. In addition to taking final Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed than 50 industries. See 40 CFR parts 405 action on this rule governing new and, without reaching the merits of the through 471. Among these, EPA has facilities by November 9, 2001, EPA regulations themselves, remanded the established effluent limitation must propose regulations for, at a rule. Appalachian Power Co. v. Train, guidelines that apply to most of the minimum, existing power plants that 566 F.2d 451 (4th Cir. 1977). EPA later industry categories that use cooling use large volumes of cooling water by withdrew part 402. 44 FR 32956 (June water intake structures (e.g., steam February 28, 2002, and take final action 7, 1979). 40 CFR 401.14 remains in electric power generation, iron and steel 18 months later. EPA must propose effect.
VerDate 11
4. How Is Section 316(b) Being have been performed and whether a environmental impact. EPA staff have Implemented Now? given facility has minimized adverse participated in other industry Since the Fourth Circuit remanded environmental impact. The Director’s conferences, met upon request on EPA’s section 316(b) regulations in determinations of whether the numerous occasions with industry 1977, NPDES permit authorities have appropriate studies have been representatives, and met on a number of made decisions implementing section performed or whether a given facility occasions with representatives of 316(b) on a case-by-case, site-specific has minimized adverse environmental environmental groups. EPA has also met basis. EPA published draft guidance impact have often been subject to with stakeholders, attended conferences addressing section 316(b) challenges that can take a long time to and held workshops concerning topics implementation in 1977. See Draft resolve and may impose significant related to the existing source Guidance for Evaluating the Adverse resource demands on permitting rulemaking effort. In the months leading up to Impact of Cooling Water Intake agencies, the public, and the permit applicant. publication of the proposed rule, EPA Structures on the Aquatic Environment: conducted a series of stakeholder Section 316(b) P.L. 92–500 (U.S. EPA, 5. Proposed New Facility Rule meetings to review the draft regulatory 1977). This draft guidance describes the On August 10, 2000, EPA published framework for the proposed rule and studies recommended for evaluating the proposed requirements for cooling water invited stakeholders to provide their impact of cooling water intake intake structures at new facilities to recommendations for the Agency’s structures on the aquatic environment implement section 316(b) of the Clean consideration. EPA managers have met and recommends a basis for determining Water Act. EPA proposed a tiered with the Utility Water Act Group, the best technology available for approach for reducing adverse Edison Electric Institute, representatives minimizing adverse environmental environmental impact, with three from an individual utility, and with impact. The 1977 section 316(b) draft degrees of stringency based on EPA’s representatives from the petroleum guidance states, ‘‘The environmental- view of the relative vulnerability of each refining, pulp and paper, and iron and intake interactions in question are category of waterbody. EPA received steel industries. EPA conducted highly site-specific and the decision as numerous comments and data meetings with environmental groups to best technology available for intake submissions concerning the proposal. attended by representatives from design, location, construction, and See 65 FR 49060. between 3 and 15 organizations. EPA capacity must be made on a case-by-case 6. Notice of Data Availability also met with the Association of State basis.’’ (Section 316(b) Draft Guidance, and Interstate Water Pollution Control U.S. EPA, 1977, p. 4). This case-by-case On May 25, 2001, EPA published a Administrators (ASIWPCA) and, with approach also is consistent with the Proposed Rule Notice of Data the assistance of ASIWPCA, conducted approach described in the 1976 Availability (NODA). This notice a conference call in which development document referenced in presented a summary of the data EPA representatives from 17 states or the remanded regulation. had received or collected since interstate organizations participated. The 1977 section 316(b) draft proposal, an assessment of the relevance After publication of the proposed rule, guidance suggests the general process of the data to EPA’s analysis, some EPA continued to meet with for developing information needed to modified technology options suggested stakeholders at their request. These support section 316(b) decisions and by commenters, and an alternative meetings are summarized in the record. presenting that information to the regulatory approach suggested by a permitting authority. The process trade group representing the utility III. Environmental Impact Associated involves the development of a site- industry as well as EPA’s ideas about With Cooling Water Intake Structures specific study of the environmental how it might modify this suggested The proposed rule provided an effects associated with each facility that approach. See 66 FR 28853. On July 6, overview of the magnitude and type of uses one or more cooling water intake 2001, EPA reopened the comment environmental impacts associated with structures, as well as consideration of period for certain documents and issues cooling water intake structures, that study by the permitting authority in related to those documents. See 66 FR including several illustrative examples determining whether the facility must 35572. of documented environmental impacts make any changes for minimizing at existing facilities (see 65 FR 49071 adverse environmental impact. Where 7. Public Participation through 4). The majority of biological adverse environmental impact is EPA has worked extensively with impacts associated with intake present, the 1977 draft guidance stakeholders from the industry, public structures are closely linked to water suggests a stepwise approach that interest groups, State agencies, and withdrawals from the various waters in considers screening systems, size, other Federal agencies in the which the intakes are located. location, capacity, and other factors. development of this final rule. In Based on preliminary estimates from Although the draft guidance describes addition to comments received during a questionnaire sent to more than 1,200 the information that should be the comment periods of the original existing power plants and factories, developed, key factors that should be proposal, the NODA, and the reopened industrial facilities in the United States considered, and a process for supporting comment period for certain documents withdraw more than 279 billion gallons section 316(b) determinations, it does referenced in the NODA, EPA of cooling water a day from waters of not establish national standards based conducted two public meetings: in June the U.S. The withdrawal of such large on the best technology available for 1998, in Arlington, Virginia (63 FR quantities of cooling water affects vast minimizing adverse environmental 27958) and in September, 1998, in quantities of aquatic organisms impact. Rather, the guidance leaves the Alexandria, Virginia (63 FR 40683). In annually, including phytoplankton decisions on the appropriate location, addition, in September 1998, EPA staff (tiny, free-floating photosynthetic design, capacity, and construction of participated in a technical workshop organisms suspended in the water each facility to the permitting authority. sponsored by the Electric Power column), zooplankton (small aquatic Under this framework, the Director Research Institute on issues relating to animals, including fish eggs and larvae, determines whether appropriate studies the definition and assessment of adverse that consume phytoplankton and other
VerDate 11
zooplankton), fish, crustaceans, impingement or entrainment, a intake structures located in or near shellfish, and many other forms of substantial number of aquatic organisms habitat areas that support threatened, aquatic life. Aquatic organisms drawn are killed or subjected to significant endangered, or other protected species. into cooling water intake structures are harm. Although limited information is either impinged on components of the In addition to impingement and available on locations of threatened or cooling water intake structure or entrainment losses associated with the endangered species that are vulnerable entrained in the cooling water system operation of the cooling water intake to impingement or entrainment, such itself. structure, EPA is concerned about the impacts do occur. For example, EPA is Impingement takes place when cumulative overall degradation of the aware that from 1976 to 1994, organisms are trapped against intake aquatic environment as a consequence approximately 3,200 threatened or screens by the force of the water passing of (1) multiple intake structures endangered sea turtles entered enclosed through the cooling water intake operating in the same watershed or in cooling water intake canals at the St. structure. Impingement can result in the same or nearby reaches and (2) Lucie Nuclear Generating Plant in starvation and exhaustion (organisms intakes located within or adjacent to an Florida.7 The plant developed a capture- are trapped against an intake screen or impaired waterbody. Historically, and-release program in response to other barrier at the entrance to the impacts related to cooling water intake these events. Most of the entrapped cooling water intake structure), structures have been evaluated on a turtles were captured and released alive; asphyxiation (organisms are pressed facility-by-facility basis. The potential however, approximately 160 turtles did against an intake screen or other barrier cumulative effects of multiple intakes not survive. More recently, the number at the entrance to the cooling water located within a specific waterbody or of sea turtles being drawn into the intake structure by velocity forces that along a coastal segment are largely intake canal increased to approximately prevent proper gill movement, or unknown (one relevant example is 600 per year; this increase led to a organisms are removed from the water provided for the Hudson River; see requirement for barrier nets to minimize for prolonged periods of time), and discussion below). There is concern, entrapment. descaling (fish lose scales when however, about the effects of multiple Finally, in the proposed rule EPA removed from an intake screen by a intakes on fishery stocks. As an expressed concern about environmental wash system) and other physical harms. example, the Atlantic States Marine impacts associated with the Entrainment occurs when organisms Fisheries Commission has been construction of new cooling water are drawn through the cooling water requested by its member States to intake structures. Three main factors intake structure into the cooling system. investigate the cumulative impacts on contribute to the environmental Organisms that become entrained are commercial fishery stocks, particularly impacts: displacement of biota and 1 normally relatively small benthic, overutilized stocks, attributable to habitat resulting from the physical 2 3 planktonic, and nektonic organisms, cooling water intakes located in coastal placement of a new cooling water intake including early life stages of fish and regions of the Atlantic.6 Specifically, the structure in an aquatic environment, shellfish. Many of these small organisms study will focus on revising existing increased levels of turbidity in the serve as prey for larger organisms that fishery management models so that they aquatic environment, and effects on are found higher on the food chain. As accurately consider and account for fish biota and habitat associated with entrained organisms pass through a losses from intake structures. aquatic disposal of materials excavated plant’s cooling system they are subject EPA analyses suggest that over 99 during construction. Existing programs, to mechanical, thermal, and/or toxic percent of the existing facilities with such as the CWA section 404 program, stress. Sources of such stress include cooling water withdrawal that EPA National Environmental Policy Act physical impacts in the pumps and surveyed in its section 316(b) survey of (NEPA) program, and programs under condenser tubing, pressure changes existing facilities are located within 2 State/Tribal law, include requirements caused by diversion of the cooling water miles of waters that are identified as that address many of the environmental into the plant or by the hydraulic effects impaired and listed by a State or Tribe impact concerns associated with the of the condensers, sheer stress, thermal as needing development of a total construction of new intakes (see Section shock in the condenser and discharge maximum daily load (TMDL) to restore VII. G for applicable Federal statutes). tunnel, and chemical toxemia induced the waterbody to its designated use. EPA recognizes that impacts related to by antifouling agents such as chlorine. EPA notes that the top four leading construction of cooling water intake The mortality rate of entrained causes of waterbody impairment structures can occur and defers to the organisms varies by species and can be (siltation, nutrients, bacteria, and regulatory authority provided within the high under normal operating metals) affect the aquatic life uses of a above-listed programs to evaluate the conditions.45 In the case of either waterbody. The Agency believes that potential for impacts and minimize their cooling water intakes potentially 1 Refers to bottom dwellers that are generally extent. small and sessile (attached) such as mussels and contribute additional stress to waters In the proposed rule and NODA, EPA anemones, but can include certain large motile (able already showing aquatic life impairment provided a number of examples of to move) species such as crabs and shrimp. These from other sources such as industrial impingement and entrainment impacts species can be important members of the food discharges and urban stormwater. that can be associated with existing chain. EPA is also concerned about the 2 Refers to free-floating microscopic plants and facilities. It is important to note that animals, including the egg and larval stages of fish potential impacts of cooling water these examples were not meant to and invertebrates that have limited swimming predict effects at new facilities but abilities. Plankton are also an important source of estuarine environments. Environmental Science rather to illustrate that the number of food for other aquatic organisms and an essential and Policy 3:S295–S301. organisms impinged and entrained by a component of the food chain in aquatic ecosystems. 5 EPRI. 2000. Review of entrainment survival 3 Refers to free-swimming organisms (e.g., fish, studies: 1970–2000. Prepared by EA Engineering facility can be substantial. EPA also turtles, marine mammals) that move actively Science and Technology for the Electric Power through the water column and against currents. Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA. 7 Florida Power and Light Company. 1995. 4 Mayhew, D.A., L.D. Jensen, D.F. Hanson, and 6 Personal communication, telephone Assessment of the impacts at the St. Lucie Nuclear P.H. Muessig. 2000. A comparative review of conversation between D. Hart (EPA) and L. Kline Generating Plant on sea turtle species found in the entrainment survival studies at power plants in (ASMFC), 2001. inshore waters of Florida.
VerDate 11
notes that these are examples of the entrained organisms.13 The New York miles southeast of San Clemente, types of impacts that may occur without Department of Environmental California.17 The marine portions of controls, that these examples are not Conservation concluded that these Units 2 and 3, which are once-through, representative of all sites whose reductions in year-class strength were open-cycle cooling systems, began facilities use cooling water intake ‘‘wholly unacceptable’’ and that any commercial operation in August 1983 structures, and that these examples may ‘‘compensatory responses to this level of and April 1984, respectively.18 Since not reflect subsequent action that may power plant mortality could seriously then, many studies evaluated the impact have been taken to address these deplete any resilience or compensatory of the SONGS facility on the marine impacts on a site-specific basis. With capacity of the species needed to environment. these notes, EPA provides the following survive unfavorable environmental In a normal (non-El Nin˜ o) year, an examples, illustrating that the impacts conditions.’’14 estimated 121 tons of midwater fish attributable to impingement and The following are summaries of other, (primarily northern anchovy, queenfish, entrainment at individual facilities may documented examples of impacts and white croaker) are entrained at result in appreciable losses of early life occurring at existing facilities sited on a SONGS, of which at least 57 percent are stages of fish and shellfish (e.g., three to range of waterbody types. Also, see the killed during plant passage.19 The fish four billion individuals annually 8), discussion of the benefits of today’s lost include approximately 350,000 serious reductions in forage species and final rule in Section IX. juveniles of white croaker, a popular recreational and commercial landings Brayton Point Generating Station. The sport fish; this number represents (e.g., 23 tons lost per year 9), and Brayton Point Generating Station is 33,000 adult individuals or 3.5 tons of extensive losses over relatively short located on Mt. Hope Bay, in Somerset, adult fish. Within 3 kilometers of intervals of time (e.g., one million fish Massachusetts, within the northeastern SONGS, the density of queenfish and lost during a three-week study reach of Narragansett Bay. Because of white croaker in shallow-water samples period 10). problems with electric arcing caused by decreased by 34 and 36 percent, Further, some studies estimating the salt drift and lack of fresh water for the respectively. Queenfish declined by 50 impact of impingement and entrainment closed-cycle recirculating cooling water to 70 percent in deepwater samples.20 A on populations of key commercial or system, the company converted Unit 4 subsequent EPA review of the SONGS recreational fish have predicted from a closed-cycle, recirculating 316(b) demonstration concluded that substantial declines in population size. system to a once-through cooling water although the plant incorporated This has lead to concerns that some system in July 1984. The modification of technologies for minimizing adverse populations may be altered beyond Unit 4 resulted in a 41 percent increase environmental impact, operations at recovery. For example, a modeling effort in coolant flow, amounting to an intake SONGS cause adverse impacts to evaluating the impact of entrainment flow of approximately 1.3 billion organisms in the cooling water system mortality on a representative fish gallons per day and increased thermal and to biological populations and species in the Cape Fear estuarine discharge to the bay.15 An analysis of communities in the vicinity of the system predicted a 15 to 35 percent fisheries data by the Rhode Island 11 intake and discharge locations for the reduction in the species population. Division of Fish and Wildlife using a plant.21 These effects included mortality In addition, studies of entrainment at time series-intervention model showed of fish, especially losses of millions of five Hudson River power plants during an 87 percent reduction in finfish eggs and larvae, that are taken into the the 1980s predicted year-class abundance in Mt. Hope Bay coincident plant with cooling water and creation of reductions ranging from six percent to with the Unit 4 modification.16 The a sometimes turbid plume that affects 79 percent, depending on the fish analysis also indicated that, in contrast, kelp, fish, and invertebrates in the San species.12 An updated analysis of species abundance trends have been Onofre kelp bed.22 entrainment at three of these power relatively stable in adjacent coastal areas Pittsburg and Contra Costa Power plants predicted year-class reductions of and portions of Narragansett Bay that Plants. The Pittsburg and Contra Costa up to 20 percent for striped bass, 25 are not influenced by the operation of Power Plants are located in the San percent for bay anchovy, and 43 percent Brayton Point station. Francisco Estuary, California. Because for Atlantic tom cod, even without San Onofre Nuclear Generating the San Francisco Bay Delta ecosystem assuming 100 percent mortality of Station. The San Onofre Nuclear has changed dramatically over the past Generating Station (SONGS) is located century, several local species (e.g., Delta 8 EPA Region IV. 1979. Brunswick Nuclear Steam on the coastline of the Southern Electric Generating Plant of Carolina Power and smelt, Sacramento splittail, chinook Light Company, historical summary and review of California Bight, approximately 2.5 salmon, and steelhead) have been listed section 316(b) issues. as threatened or endangered. Facility 9 EPA Region IV. 1986. Findings and 13 Consolidated Edison Company of New York. estimates for one of these species, determination under 33 U.S.C. 1326, In the Matter 2000. Draft environmental impact statement for the of Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Power state pollutant discharge elimination system Plant Units 1, 2, and 3, NPDES permit no. permits for Bowline Point, Indian Point 2 & 3, and 17 Southern California Edison. 1988. Report on FL0000159. Roseton steam electric generating stations. 1987 data: marine environmental analysis and 10 Thurber, N.J and D. J. Jude. 1985. Impingement 14 New York Department of Environmental interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Generating losses at the D.C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant during Conservation (NYDEC). 2000. Internal Station. 1975–1982 with a discussion of factors responsible memorandum provided to the USEPA on NYDEC’s 18 Ibid. and possible impact on local populations. Special position on SPDES permit renewals for Roseton, 19 Swarbrick, S. and R.F. Ambrose. 1989. report no. 115 of the Great Lakes Research Division, Bowline Point 1 & 2, and Indian Point 2 & 3 Technical report C: entrapment of juvenile and Great Lakes and Marine Waters Center, University generating stations. adult fish at SONGS. Prepared for Marine Review of Michigan. 15 Metcalf & Eddy. 1992. Brayton Point station Committee. 11 EPA Region IV. 1979. Brunswick Nuclear monitoring program technical review. Prepared for 20 Kastendiek, J. and K. Parker. 1989. Interim Steam Electric Generating Plant of Carolina Power USEPA. technical report: midwater and benthic fish. and Light Company, historical summary and review 16 Gibson, M. 1995 (revised 1996). Comparison of Prepared for Marine Review Committee. of section 316(b) issues. trends in the finfish assemblages of Mt. Hope Bay 21 SAIC. 1993. Draft review of Southern California 12 Boreman J. and P. Goodyear. 1988. Estimates of and Narragansett Bay in relation to operations of the Edison, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station entrainment mortality for striped bass and other New England Power Brayton Point station. Rhode (SONGS) 316(b) demonstration. Prepared for fish species inhabiting the Hudson River Estuary. Island Division of Fish and Wildlife, Marine USEPA Region IX. American Fisheries Society Monograph 4:152–160. Fisheries Office. 22 Ibid.
VerDate 11
chinook salmon, indicate that the acknowledges that these new International’s NEWGen Database to Pittsburg and Contra Costa intakes have assessment techniques may in some determine the in-scope percentage of the potential to impinge and entrain up cases provide additional rather than new combined-cycle facilities and their to 36,567 chinook salmon each year.23 better tools and perspectives. facility and cooling water Based on restoration costs, EPA characteristics. IV. Summary of the Most Significant In the January 2000 NEWGen estimates that losses for this species Revisions to the Proposed Rule alone can be valued at $25–40 million database, 94 of 466 projects met the per year. A. Data Updates following screening criteria: (1) New Power Plants with Flows Less Than facility; (2) located in the United States; 1. Number and Characteristics of New 500 MGD. The following information (3) active project (i.e., not canceled or Facilities from facility studies documents tabled); (4) anticipated date of initial impingement and entrainment losses for Chapter 5 of the Economic Analysis commercial operation after August 13, facilities with lower flows than the provides a detailed discussion of the 2001; and (5) steam electric prime previous examples: data and methodology used to estimate mover. All 94 facilities were included in 1. The Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, the number of new electric generating the analysis of new combined-cycle located on Cape Cod Bay, facilities and new manufacturing facilities. EPA then consulted Massachusetts, has an intake flow of 446 facilities subject to the final section permitting authorities, other public MGD.24 The average annual total losses 316(b) new facility rule. This section agencies, and company websites to of fish (all life stages) was 26,800 due to provides a summary of primary obtain data on the planned facility impingement and 3.92 billion due to revisions to the analyses since the cooling water use. EPA obtained entrainment25 proposal. The section discusses new sufficient data to assess the in-scope 2. The Coleman Power Plant, located combined-cycle facilities, new coal status for 56 of the 94 facilities. Seven on the Ohio River in Henderson, facilities, and new manufacturing of the 56 facilities, or 12.5 percent, were Kentucky, has an intake flow of 337 facilities separately. found to be in scope of the proposed 25 MGD and combined average a. New Combined-Cycle Facilities rule; 49 were found to be out of scope. impingement and entrainment losses of To estimate the total number of new in- 702,630,800 fish per year (30,800 The general approach for estimating scope combined-cycle facilities impinged and 702,600,000 entrained).26 the number of new combined-cycle projected to begin operation between Existing and historical studies like facilities subject to the final section 2001 and 2020, EPA applied the average those described in this section may 316(b) new facility rule has not changed facility size of the seven in-scope provide only a partial picture of the since proposal. However, and as NEWGen facilities (723 MW) and the in- severity of environmental impact discussed in the notice of data scope percentage (12.5 percent) to EIA’s associated with cooling water intake availability (NODA), EPA has used new forecast of new combined-cycle capacity structures. Most important, the methods data, which have become available since additions. EPA made the conservative for evaluating adverse environmental the proposal, to update the analysis. As assumption that all new combined-cycle impact used in the 1970s and 1980s, a result, the number of new combined- capacity would be built at new facilities when most section 316(b) evaluations cycle facilities now projected to be in rather than at existing facilities. These were performed, were often inconsistent scope of this rule has increased from 24 calculations resulted in an estimate of and incomplete, making detection and in the proposed rule analysis to 69 in 24 new in-scope combined-cycle consideration of all impacts difficult in the updated analysis for the final rule. facilities over the 2001–2020 period (see some cases, and making cross-facility (1) Proposed Rule also Exhibit 1 below). comparison difficult for developing a For the proposal analysis, EPA used a (2) Final Rule national rule. For example, some studies three-step approach to estimating the reported only gross fish losses; others For the final rule analysis and as number of new combined-cycle discussed in the NODA, EPA used the reported fish losses on the basis of facilities: (1) Determination of future species and life stage; still others same general methodology but obtained combined-cycle capacity additions; (2) updated information. In particular, EPA reported percent losses of the associated estimation of the percentage of all population or subpopulation (e.g., used the forecast of capacity additions regulated combined-cycle facilities that from the U.S. Department of Energy’s young-of-year fish). Recent advances in are in-scope; and (3) estimation of the environmental assessment techniques Annual Energy Outlook (AEO2001) and number of new facilities. EPA used the the February 2001 NEWGen Database. provide new and in some cases better Annual Energy Outlook 2000 tools for monitoring impingement and AEO2001’s forecast of new combined- (AEO2000), prepared and published by cycle capacity additions between 2001 entrainment and detecting impacts the Energy Information Administration and 2020 was 204 GW, compared with associated with the operation of cooling (EIA) of the U.S. Department of Energy, 131 GW in the AEO2000. Similarly, the water intake structures.27 28 EPA as the basis for the projected number of February 2001 NEWGen Database new in-scope combined-cycle facilities. contains considerably more new energy 23 Southern Energy. 2000. Habitat conservation The AEO2000 forecast 131 gigawatts plan for the Pittsburg and Contra Costa Power projects than the version used for the Plants. (GW) of new combined-cycle capacity to proposed rule analysis: The database 24 Edison Electric Institute. 1994. EEI Power begin operation between 2001 and 2020. contains 941 new projects, of which 361 Statistics Database. Prepared by the Utility Data Since the AEO does not have any met the screening criteria discussed Institute. information on the number of new above. Of the 361 facilities, 320 are 25 Data compiled by EPA from annual reports of facilities, their size, or their cooling impingement and entrainment losses from the combined-cycle facilities. To increase Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station for the years 1991– water characteristics, EPA used the the number of facilities upon which 1999. January 2000 version of Resource Data facility and cooling water use 26 Hicks, D.B. 1977. Statement of findings for the characteristics are based, EPA excluded Coleman Power Plant, Henderson, Kentucky. 28 EPRI. 1999. Catalog of assessment methods for 27 Schmitt, R.J. and C.W. Osenberg. 1996. evaluating the effects of power plant operations on the anticipated date of initial Detecting Ecological Impacts. Academic Press, San aquatic communities. TR–112013, EPRI, Palo Alto, commercial operation as a screening Diego, CA. CA. criterion. The analysis for the final rule
VerDate 11
therefore includes all facilities that meet size of the 57 in-scope facilities was 747 capacity that will be built at new the other four screening criteria, even if MW. EPA made one other revision in facilities (88 percent) to determine that a facility will already have begun estimating the total number of new in- 179 GW of new capacity will be construction when the rule is scope combined-cycle facilities constructed at new facilities. EPA then promulgated and will therefore not be projected to begin operation between divided this value by the average facility subject to the final rule. 2001 and 2020: Instead of assuming that size (741 MW) to determine that there EPA again consulted permitting all new combined-cycle capacity would would be a total of 241 potential new authorities, other public agencies, and be built at new facilities, EPA used combined-cycle facilities (both in scope company websites to obtain data on the information on combined-cycle capacity and out of scope of today’s final rule). facilities’ planned cooling water use. additions at existing facilities from the Finally, on the basis of EPA’s estimate EPA obtained sufficient data to assess NEWGen Database to determine the of the percentage of facilities that meet the cooling water characteristics for 199 actual share of capacity that will be the two (2) MGD flow threshold (28.6 of the 320 combined-cycle facilities. Of built at new facilities. The database percent), EPA now estimates there will the 199 facilities, 57, or 28.6 percent, showed that 88 percent of new be 69 new in-scope combined-cycle were found to be in scope of the final combined-cycle capacity is proposed at facilities over the 2001–2020 period. rule; 142 were found to be out of scope. new facilities. EPA used the Department Exhibit 1 summarizes the data The average size of all 199 facilities of Energy’s estimate of new combined- differences for combined-cycle facilities with cooling water information was cycle capacity additions (204 GW) and between the proposal and the final rule approximately 741 MW. The average multiplied it by the percentage of analyses.
EXHIBIT 1.—SUMMARY OF COMBINED-CYCLE FACILITY RESEARCH (2001 TO 2020)
Proposed Final Information category rule rule analysis analysis
AEO2000 combined-cycle capacity additions ...... 135 GWa AEO2001 combined-cycle capacity additions ...... 204 GW Percentage of combined-cycle capacity additions from new facilities ...... 100% 88% Capacity additions from new facilities ...... 135 GW 179 GW Average size of all combined-cycle facilities ...... 723 MW 741 MW Total number of new combined-cycle facilities ...... 187 241 In-scope percentage ...... 12.5% 28.6% Number of new in-scope combined-cycle facilities ...... 24 69 Average size of in-scope combined-cycle facilities ...... 723 MW 747 MW a Includes 4 GW of new coal capacity additions for 2001–2010.
The final step in the costing analysis to this final rule has not changed since U.S. Department of Energy, 1994, 1997); for the final rule was to project cooling proposal. However, as discussed in the Form EIA–860 (Annual Electric water characteristics of the 69 new in- NODA, EPA has used new data, which Generator Report, Energy Information scope combined-cycle facilities on the have become available since the Administration, U.S. Department of basis of the characteristics of the 57 in- proposal, to update the analysis. As a Energy, 1994, 1997); and Power scope NEWGen facilities. EPA result, the number of new coal facilities Statistics Database (Utility Data developed six model facility types based projected to be in scope of this rule, Institute, McGraw-Hill Company, 1994). on three main characteristics: (1) The decreased slightly, from 16 in the EPA estimated that 16 new coal facility’s type of cooling system (once- proposed rule analysis to 14 in the final facilities of 800 MW each would be through or recirculating system); (2) the rule analysis. However, most of the new subject to the proposed section 316(b) type of water body from which the in-scope coal facilities are now expected new facility rule and would begin intake structure withdraws (freshwater to begin operation earlier than under the operation between 2011 and 2020. Of or marine water); and (3) the facility’s proposal analysis. these, 12 were projected to operate a steam-electric generating capacity. The recirculating system in the baseline, (1) Proposed Rule model facility characteristics were then while four were projected to operate a applied to the 69 projected new For the years 2001–2010, the once-through system. combined-cycle facilities. EPA AEO2000 projected limited new coal- (2) Final Rule estimated that 64 new in-scope fired steam electric generating capacity. combined-cycle facilities will employ a In addition, the January 2000 NEWGen EPA used a similar methodology for recirculating system and only five will Database included no new coal-fired the final rule analysis but obtained employ a once-through system. Of the generating facilities. EPA therefore did updated information and added data 64 facilities with a recirculating system, not project any new coal facilities for from the section 316(b) industry survey 58 will withdraw from a freshwater 2001–2010. For the years 2011–2020, of existing facilities (Industry Screener body and six will withdraw from a EPA used EIA’s projected new capacity Questionnaire: Phase I Cooling Water marine water body. All five facilities addition from coal-fired facilities, 17 Intake Structures, Detailed Industry with a once-through system are GW, and information from the following Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water projected to withdraw from a marine sources to estimate the number and Intake Structures, and Industry Short water body. cooling water characteristics of new Technical Questionnaire: Phase II coal-fired power facilities subject to the Cooling Water Intake Structures). To be b. New Coal Facilities rule: Form EIA–767 (Steam Electric consistent with the analysis for The general approach for estimating Plant Operation and Design Report, combined-cycle facilities, EPA used the the number of new coal facilities subject Energy Information Administration, forecast of capacity additions from the
VerDate 11
AEO2001, which predicts 22 GW of new generating capacity of 53 GW, with an built at new facilities. Applying this coal capacity between 2001 and 2020. In average of 475 MW each. The surveys percentage (76 percent), as well as the contrast to the proposal analysis, EPA further showed that 45 of the 111 average facility size (475 MW) and the considered the entire 2001–2020 period facilities, or 40.5 percent, would be in in-scope percentage (40.5 percent), to for the final rule analysis. In addition, scope of today’s final rule if they were EIA’s forecast of new coal capacity EPA used information from the section new facilities. These 45 facilities have additions resulted in 14 new in-scope 316(b) industry survey to determine the an average generating capacity of 763 coal facilities, with an average capacity average size, in-scope percentage, and MW. of 763 MW, over the 2001–2020 period. cooling water characteristics of new coal Information in the February 2001 Exhibit 2 summarizes the data version of the NEWGen Database on plants. The three surveys identified 111 differences for coal facilities between unique coal-fired facilities that began capacity additions at new and existing the proposal and the final rule analyses. commercial operation between 1980 and facilities showed that approximately 76 1999. The facilities have a combined percent of new coal capacity will be
EXHIBIT 2.—SUMMARY OF COAL FACILITY RESEARCH
Proposed Final rule rule analysis analysis (2011–2020) (2001–2020)
AEO2000 coal capacity additions ...... 17 GW AEO2001 coal capacity additions ...... 22 GW Percentage of coal capacity additions from new facilities ...... 82% 76% Capacity additions from new faciliteis ...... 14 GW 17 GW Average size of all coal facilities ...... 800 MW 475 MW Total number of new coal facilities ...... 18 35 In-scope percentage ...... 99.0% 40.5% Number of new in-scope coal facilities ...... 16 14 Average size of in-scope coal facilities ...... 800 MW 763 MW
EPA projected cooling water on the basis of comments, EPA has increases in petroleum shipments will characteristics of the 14 new in-scope altered some estimates and used new result from expanded capacity at coal facilities using data for recently- data to update the analysis. As a result, existing facilities. Where this constructed plants from the section the number of new manufacturing information was not available, EPA 316(b) industry survey. Similar to the facilities projected to be in scope of this made the conservative estimate that 50 combined-cycle facility analysis, EPA rule has decreased from 58 at proposal percent of the projected growth in developed eight model facility types to 38 in the final rule analysis. capacity will be attributed to new based on three main characteristics: (1) facilities. Finally, EPA assumed that the (1) Proposed Rule The facility’s type of cooling system cooling water use characteristics of new (once-though or recirculating system); In the proposal analysis, EPA used facilities in each industry, including the (2) the type of water body from which three industry-specific estimates to in-scope percentage, would be similar to the intake structure withdraws project the number of new in-scope those of existing facilities. Cooling water (freshwater or marine water); and (3) the manufacturing facilities: (1) Industry use data for existing facilities came from facility’s steam-electric generating growth forecasts; (2) the estimated the Industry Screener Questionnaire: capacity. The model facility percentage of the projected capacity Phase I Cooling Water Intake Structures. characteristics were then applied to the growth accounted for by new facilities; To calculate the total number of new in- 14 projected new coal facilities. EPA and (3) data on the cooling water use at scope manufacturing facilities, EPA estimated that 10 new in-scope coal existing facilities. EPA used the applied the industry-specific growth facilities will employ a recirculating projected growth of value of shipments rate and the percentage of capacity system and three will employ a once- in each industry to estimate likely growth from new facilities to the through system. One coal facility has a future growth in capacity. A number of sample-weighted number of in-scope recirculating cooling pond and will sources provided growth forecasts, screener facilities in each industry. exhibit characteristics more like a once- including the annual U.S. Industry & (2) Final Rule through facility. Of the10 facilities with Trade Outlook, AEO2001, and other a recirculating system, nine will sources specific to each industry. EPA For the final rule analysis, EPA withdraw from a freshwater body and assumed that the growth in capacity updated the projected growth in value only one facility will withdraw from a will equal growth in value of shipments, of shipments for each industry using the marine water body. All three facilities except where industry-specific most recent data available. On the basis with a once-through system and the one information supported alternative of comments, three changes were made facility with a cooling pond are assumptions. Not all industry growth, to the percentage of projected capacity projected to withdraw from a freshwater however, is expected to occur at new growth that is attributed to new body. facilities: Some of the projected growth facilities. First, the American Chemistry in capacity may result from increased Council stated that EPA overestimated c. Manufacturing Facilities utilization of existing capacity or the number of new in-scope chemical The general methodology used to capacity additions at existing facilities. facilities in the proposal analysis estimate the number of new Where information on the share of because the percentage of growth that manufacturing facilities subject to the growth from new facilities was comes from new facilities (50 percent) final section 316(b) new facility rule has available, EPA used these data. For was overstated. The comment did not not changed since proposal. However, example, EIA projected that all provide a more accurate estimate. EPA
VerDate 11
therefore revised this estimate for the costs on a national basis to reflect plume In the final rule, EPA has included chemical industry to 25 percent, which abatement costs at a significantly lower cost estimates for energy penalties due reduced the number of new chemical proportion of facilities. EPA to operating power losses from facilities by half. (The Economic determined, on the basis of further recirculating cooling tower systems. Analysis documents the effect of using research and information received from Further information on this subject can an alternative assumption of 37.5 vendor manufacturers, that plume be found in Section IV.A.3 of this percent, the midpoint between the abatement measures were installed at preamble, below. proposal analysis estimate and the final only 3 to 4 percent of recent wet cooling 3. Energy Penalty Estimates for rule analysis estimate, in analyzing the tower projects. Therefore, the costing Recirculating Wet Cooling and Dry economic impacts of this rule.) Second, estimates for the final rule reflect this Cooling Towers the petroleum industry commented that change. the assumption of no new petroleum At the time of the proposal, EPA Since proposal, as discussed in the refineries over the next 20 years is included cost estimates for pumping of NODA (66 FR 28866), EPA has included invalid. Even though the AEO2001 recirculating cooling water in the towers in its estimates of O&M costs the projects no new refineries in the United based on a flow rate equal to 15 percent performance penalties that may result in States, to be conservative EPA of a comparable once-through cooling reductions of energy or capacity nevertheless revised this estimate and flow (based on the flow of make-up produced because of adoption of included two new in-scope petroleum water). As explained in the NODA (66 recirculating cooling tower systems. The refineries in the final rule analysis. FR 28866), this was an error. EPA has cost estimates for the final rule include Third, the American Forest & Paper since refined its costing estimates to consideration of these penalties. The Association stated that one or two new include the entire cooling flow. EPA’s final rule cost estimates account for the greenfield paper mills will be built over cost estimates for both capital and O&M energy penalty at facilities that are the next decade. EPA added two new in costs for the final rule reflect projected to install recirculating wet scope paper mills over the 20-year appropriately sized pumps to recirculate cooling tower systems in lieu of once- analysis period in response to this the full design cooling water flow. The through cooling systems. EPA’s cost comment. In addition, EPA updated the in-tower cooling water flow is now estimates for dry cooling regulatory water use characteristics of the based on the level of cooling necessary alternatives account for the appropriate projected new facilities by using data for the condenser and the plants’ energy penalty of this technology at from the Detailed Industry cooling needs. each facility projected to install such a Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water Since proposal, EPA has included system. Intake Structures instead of the costs from additional projects in the For the final rule, EPA’s costing Screener Questionnaire. In the proposal calculation of its costing estimates for methodology for performance penalties analysis, EPA erroneously used the recirculating wet cooling towers. EPA is based on the concept of lost operating average daily intake flow rate, instead of obtained further ‘‘turn-key’’ vendor revenue due to a mean annual the design intake flow rate, to determine project costs that have been performance penalty. EPA estimated the whether a facility meets the two MGD incorporated into the specific costing mean annual performance penalty for flow threshold and is subject to the rule. equations used to calculate the capital each tower technology as compared Since the average intake flow is either and operation and maintenance (O&M) with once-through or recirculating wet lower than or equal to the design intake costs of the final rule. Turn-key project cooling systems (where applicable for flow, this error likely underestimated costs represents all costing elements the dry cooling analysis). EPA then the number of new in-scope necessary to estimate engineering costs, applied this mean annual penalty to the manufacturing facilities. For the such as vendor overhead, equipment, annual revenue estimates for each analysis of the final rule, EPA used the wiring, foundations and contingencies. facility projected to install a design intake flows reported in the EPA included these project costs in the recirculating cooling tower technology section 316(b) industry survey. calculation of the costing equations in as a result of the rule or a regulatory Overall, because of the revisions order to increase the number of real- option. EPA considers these revenue described above, EPA’s estimate of the world projects upon which the final cost losses as representative of the cost to the number of new in-scope manufacturing estimates are based. facility for either replacing the power facilities dropped from 58 at proposal to EPA has refined its estimates of O&M lost via the market or expanding the 38 in the cost analysis for this final rule. costs for recirculating wet cooling capacity of the new power plant. towers since proposal. At the time of Chapter 3 of the Technical 2. Revisions to the Costing Estimates proposal, EPA estimated economy of Development Document discusses Chapter 2 of the Technical scale for O&M costs for recirculating, performance penalties in more detail. Development Document provides a wet cooling towers as their size detailed description of the data and increases. EPA based this estimate 4. Significant Changes to the Economic methodology used to develop primarily on the economy of scale Analysis a. Revisions to Costing compliance cost estimates for the final savings for wastewater treatment Analysis regulation. This section provides a systems as wastewater flow increases. EPA has made a methodological summary of the main revisions in the The overall effect of this approach change for estimating the cost for costing inputs since the proposal. showed that for very large cooling today’s rule. For the proposal, EPA At the time of the proposal, EPA towers, a savings of nearly two-thirds directly estimated the incremental cost included cost estimates for plume was achieved compared with smaller of the rule without estimating the abatement at 50 percent of the electric cooling towers. On the basis of baseline cost. This made it difficult to generating facilities anticipated to comments received and further identify the magnitude of changes in install recirculating wet cooling towers research, EPA has refined its estimates relevant components of a system of a to comply with the rule. This was an of O&M costs and economies of scale. facility and their individual costs. For error. As described in the NODA (66 FR The cost estimates presented for the the final rule, EPA separately estimated 28866 and 28867), EPA has since final rule reflect this revision to the the baseline costs and the cost after refined its estimates of cooling tower analysis. meeting the requirements of the rule.
VerDate 11
Thus, the incremental cost attributed to demand in the chemical industry would on uniform national requirements of the rule is derived from the difference be met from new facilities. Commenters flow reduction commensurate with between the baseline cost and the cost pointed out that this assumption leads closed-cycle recirculating wet cooling after compliance with the requirements to an overestimation of the number of systems (wet cooling towers) or with of the rule. new facilities and EPA agrees. wet-cooling systems in Track I of a two- For the proposal, EPA estimated the Therefore, EPA has revised this track rule. EPA anticipates, because of cost of the rule to be $12 million. This assumption to 25 percent for the measurable performance penalties estimate was in part based on the analysis supporting today’s rule. associated with cooling tower systems assumption that 90 percent of the coal EPA has also examined the cost of the (see Section IV.A.3 of this preamble), facilities would be within the scope of rule as a percentage of (annual) revenue that, depending on the regulatory the rule. Since the publication of the for purposes of determining whether the option, air emissions nationally could proposal, EPA has analyzed additional options are economically practicable. increase from all or a small subset of information regarding coal facilities. The worst-case, or upper-limit, cost new power plants as a result of the This information shows that 40.5 estimate for the rule is between 3.3 to installation of cooling tower systems. percent of the coal facilities would be 5.2 percent of estimated revenues (for EPA estimates the marginal air within the scope of the rule. EPA also three coal facilities), between 1 and 3 emissions increases by assuming that revised the baseline characteristics for percent for an additional six facilities, the energy lost by the facility cannot be these facilities. For the final rule, EPA and less than 1 percent for the rest of replaced through additional fuel estimates that 71 percent of new in- the facilities. EPA concludes that those consumption at that facility, but rather, scope coal facilities would have costs are economically practicable and the energy will be replaced by the entire recirculating cooling towers will not pose a barrier to entry for new grid as a whole. Thus, the replacement independent of the rule. For combined- facilities. The initial compliance cost of energy necessary to compensate for the cycle facilities, EPA used the January the rule (i.e., capital costs and performance penalty is generated by the 2000 version of the NEWGen database at permitting costs) as a percentage of proposal to estimate the proportion of construction cost of an electric mix of fuels present in the entire grid. the facilities that would be within the generation facility is 3.4 percent for one This is because, in EPA’s view and on scope of the proposal. In view of the coal facility, between 1.0 and 3.0 the basis of comments received, power changes in the energy market, EPA is percent for an additional seven plants are not always capable of using a more current version (February facilities, and less than 1.0 percent for compensating for an energy shortfall 2001) of the NEWGen database for the the rest of the electric generation due to a performance penalty of a final analysis. Consequently, EPA is facilities. EPA finds that these are recirculating cooling tower by revising the in-scope percentage for relatively low compliance costs. EPA increasing their fuel consumption. Even combined-cycle facilities to 28.6 percent does not consider that the cost of the though the estimated mean annual for the final analysis, instead of 12.5 rule would be a barrier to entry for new performance penalty for recirculating percent used for the proposal. facilities and also finds that cost to be wet cooling towers is small, EPA For the proposal, EPA used the economically practicable. estimates that facilities designed for average flow from the section 316(b) once-through cooling would not always industry survey, screener questionnaire 5. Air Emissions Increases as a Result of be designed with sufficient excess for existing manufacturing facilities to Certain Regulatory Options capacity to compensate for the estimate the technology and O&M costs For the final rule, and as discussed in performance penalties caused by for new manufacturing facilities. EPA the NODA, EPA includes estimates of recirculating wet cooling tower believes that the average flow would annual air emissions increases for installations as a result of this rule. underestimate the costs because costs certain pollutants from new power Therefore, EPA determines that mostly depend on design of a facility. plants as a result of certain regulatory marginal increases in air emissions due Therefore, EPA is using the design flow options considered. EPA developed to performance penalties are best for estimating the cost for estimates for air emissions increases for represented by estimating that the entire manufacturing facilities for the final SO2, NOX, CO2, and Hg for the grid will replace the energy loss. EPA’s rule. For the proposal, EPA assumed regulatory options based on near-zero estimates of marginal increases of air that 50 percent of the growth in product intake (dry cooling) and for those based emissions are presented in Exhibit 3.
EXHIBIT 3.—ESTIMATES OF MARGINAL INCREASES OF AIR EMISSIONS FOR RECIRCULATING WET COOLING TOWERS a
Capacity Annual CO 2 Annual SO 2 Annual NOX Annual Hg (MW) (tons) (tons) (tons) (lbs)
National Emissions from Electricity Generation ...... 828,631 2,575,814,488 13,581,673 6,437,710 86,722
Air Emission Increases if Plants Compensate With Increased Fuel Consumption
National Electricity Generation Air Emissions Increases for Wet 712,886 1,543 1,518 23 Cooling. (.0028%) (.0011%) (.0024%) (.0026%)
Air Emission Increases if Plants Purchase Replacement Power From Market
National Electricity Generation Air Emissions Increases for Wet 485,860 2,561 1,214 16 Cooling. (.0019%) (.0019%) (.0019%) (.0019%) a This analysis assumes that annual emissions from energy generation are constant from 1998 to 2020, even though generation is projected to increase steadily over the next twenty years. Therefore, these estimates are slightly overstated.
VerDate 11
B. Regulatory Approach specific studies to demonstrate to the final rule include: (1) Technology-based permit director that alternative performance requirements for different 1. Proposed Rule technologies or approaches could types of waters, with intake capacity EPA proposed flow, velocity, and reduce impingement and entrainment to limits based on closed-cycle other design and construction the same or a greater degree than the recirculating wet cooling systems technologies requirements based on the Track I technology-based performance required only in estuaries, tidal rivers, type of waterbody in which the intake standards. See 66 FR 28868 to 28872. the Great Lakes, and oceans; (2) national structure is located and, for certain technology-based performance 3. Final Rule types of waters, the location of the requirements for all waterbodies, with intake in the water body. EPA proposed In this rule, EPA is establishing a two- flow reduction commensurate with the to group surface water into four track technology-based approach that level achieved with closed-cycle categories: freshwater rivers and does not distinguish between waterbody recirculating wet cooling; (3) national streams, lakes and reservoirs, estuaries types or the location of the intake technology-based performance and tidal rivers, and oceans. For each of structure within the waterbody type. requirements for all waterbodies with a these waterbody types, EPA divided the Track I establishes capacity (for near-zero intake level (based on dry waterbody into sections based on the facilities with a design intake flow equal cooling); 29 and (4) a case-by-case, site- defined ‘‘littoral zone.’’ At proposal, to or greater than 10 MGD), velocity, specific approached based on the 1977 littoral zone was defined as any and capacity- and location-based draft guidance document.30 In addition nearshore area in a freshwater river or proportional flow requirements to to these options, EPA also considered stream, lake or reservoir, or estuary or reduce impingement and entrainment of variations on each of the technology- tidal river extending from the level of fish, shellfish, eggs, and larvae and based options using on a two-track highest seasonal water to the deepest requires the applicant to select and permitting approach. The two-track point at which submerged aquatic implement design and control options include one presented by vegetation can be sustained (i.e., the technologies to minimize impingement industry for consideration. The two- photic zone extending from shore to the and entrainment in certain areas. Track track approach establishes a specific set substrate receiving one (1) percent of I applicants with intake flow between 2 of technology-based performance incident light); where there is a and 10 MGD do not have to comply requirements that a permittee can significant change in slope that results with a capacity limitation but then must implement that reflect best technology in changes to habitat or community use technologies to reduce entrainment available for minimizing adverse structure; and where there is a at all locations. Track II allows a facility environmental impact; this approach significant change in the composition of to conduct a comprehensive also provides permittees with flexibility the substrate (e.g., cobble to sand, sand demonstration study to show that to demonstrate that an alternative set of to mud). In oceans, the littoral zone alternative controls will achieve requirements achieves a comparable encompassed the photic zone of the comparable performance. The two-track level of performance. neritic region. The photic zone is that approach balances the goal of providing For all the options except for those part of the water that receives sufficient regulatory certainty and fast permitting based on dry cooling, EPA also sunlight for plants to be able to for new facilities with the goal of considered requiring a design through- photosynthesize. The neritic region is allowing flexibility by including a screen velocity of 0.5 ft/s, location- and the shallow water or nearshore zone performance-based alternative. Track I capacity-based flow restrictions over the continental shelf. streamlines the permitting process, proportional to the size of the In general, the closer the intake providing a high degree of certainty that waterbody (such as a requirement for structure was to the littoral zone, the a facility will obtain a National streams and rivers allowing no more more stringent the proposed best- Pollutant Discharge Elimination System than 5 percent withdrawal of the mean technology-available requirements for (NPDES) permit without delays. In annual flow), and design and minimizing adverse environmental EPA’s view, Track II provides an construction technologies to minimize impact became. For example, an intake incentive for the development of impingement mortality and structure located within the littoral zone innovative technologies that will entrainment. In addition, EPA would have required the most stringent represent best technology available for considered requiring post-operational capacity and velocity controls as well as minimizing impingement and monitoring of impinged and entrained the use of other design and construction entrainment from cooling water intake organisms, monitoring of the through- technologies. EPA also proposed the structures. screen velocity, and periodic visual most stringent requirements for best inspections of the intake structures. technology available for minimizing V. Basis for the Final Regulation adverse environmental impact in all A. Major Options Considered for the 1. Technology-Based Performance parts of tidal rivers and estuaries Final Rule Requirements for Different Types of because of the potential for high Waterbodies biological productivity in these waters. EPA considered and analyzed several technology-based regulatory options to Under this option, EPA would 2. Notice of Data Availability determine the best technology available establish requirements for minimizing adverse environmental impact from In the NODA, EPA sought comment for minimizing adverse environmental cooling water intake structures based on on various versions of a two-track impact for new facilities. All of these approach resulting from comments options were analyzed and compared 29 EPA also examined subcategorization strategies received on the proposal. Under this with the current requirements applied for the dry cooling based option, on the basis of approach, a facility would choose to to NPDES permits for existing facilities regional distribution of facilities, size of facilities, pursue one of two tracks. In general with cooling water intake structures. and type of facility (i.e., steam electric power plants (based on size), Track I would establish Although the Agency considered versus manufacturing facilities). 30 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1977. national technology-based performance numerous regulatory options during Draft guidance for evaluating the adverse impact of requirements, whereas Track II would rule development, the primary options cooling water intake structures on the aquatic allow the facility to conduct site- considered in development of today’s environment: section 316(b) P.L. 92–500.
VerDate 11
the type of waterbody in which the 2. National Technology-Based acceptable level and there would be no intake structure is located, the location Performance Requirements for All delay in the permitting of new facilities. of the intake in the waterbody, the Waterbodies The option would require no baseline volume of water withdrawn, and the a. Flow Reduction Commensurate With biological characterization study prior design intake velocity. EPA would also the Level Achieved by Closed-Cycle to submission of the application for a establish additional requirements or Recirculating Wet Cooling Systems permit, due to the requirement of near- zero intake. measures for location, design, EPA also considered a regulatory construction, or capacity that might be In addition, EPA analyzed three option for new facilities based primarily subcategorization strategies for the final necessary for minimizing adverse on intake-flow reduction from all rule based on the dry cooling environmental impact. Under this cooling water intake structures technology. EPA considered option, the best technology available for commensurate with the level that can be establishing zero or very low-level minimizing adverse environmental achieved using a closed-cycle intake requirements only for steam impact would constitute a technology recirculating cooling water system. This electric power plants locating in cold suite that would vary depending on the option does not distinguish between northern climates. See Section V.C.1. type of waterbody in which a cooling facilities on the basis of the waterbody EPA also separately analyzed a zero or water intake structure is located and the from which they withdraw cooling very low-level intake requirement for location of the cooling water intake water. In addition to reducing design steam electric power plants of small structure within the waterbody. EPA intake velocity and complying with capacity (those with total capacity less would set technology-based capacity- and location-based than 500 MW). See Section V.C.1. For performance requirements; the Agency proportional flow requirements, all both of these subcategorization would not mandate the use of any facilities need to complete a baseline strategies, all facilities not complying specific technology. biological characterization study prior with dry cooling technology-based to submitting the application for a performance requirements would Under this option, EPA considered permit. This study would detail the comply with the national requirement of only requiring intake flow reduction design and construction technologies capacity reduction based on closed- commensurate with the level that can be necessary to maximize the survival of cycle recirculating wet cooling. The dry achieved using a closed-cycle impinged adult and juvenile fish and to cooling subcategories would require no recirculating wet cooling system for minimize the entrainment of eggs and baseline biological characterization intakes located in estuaries, tidal rivers, larvae. The applicant would also need study prior to submission of the oceans, and the Great Lakes. For all to comply with any additional application for permit, because of the other waterbody types, the only capacity requirements established by the Director requirement of near-zero intake. EPA requirements would be proportional as reasonably necessary to minimize found that the permit writer’s regulatory flow reduction requirements. In all impingement and entrainment as a implementation burden would be of an waterbodies, velocity limits and a result of the effects of multiple cooling acceptable level and there could be a requirement to study, select, and install water intake structures in the same delay of up to 6 months in the design and construction technologies waterbody, seasonal variations in the permitting of new facilities under the would apply. EPA determined that the aquatic environment affected by the dry cooling based subcategories. EPA annual compliance cost to industry for cooling water intake structures discusses why it is not adopting the dry this option would be $36.3 million. EPA controlled by the permit, or the cooling approach for subcategories found that the regulatory presence of regionally important based on size and/or climate in Section implementation burden would be of an species. EPA did not determine the V.C. below. annual compliance cost to industry for acceptable level but that the delay in this option. EPA found that the permit 3. Two-Track Options permitting of new facilities could be up writer’s regulatory implementation For each of the regulatory options to 6 months if all new facilities were burden would be of an acceptable level. outlined above that requires reduction required to complete a baseline EPA adopted this option, in part, as of flow commensurate with the level biological characterization study prior Track I of the two-track approach. achieved with closed-cycle recirculating to submitting an application for a cooling systems, EPA also considered a permit. This study would detail the b. Intake Capacity Reduction number of two-track options. The two- potential design and construction Commensurate with the Level Achieved track options provide flexibility to the technologies that would apply to all by Use of a Dry Cooling System permittee in that the facility may choose new facilities and would be required EPA considered a regulatory option to comply by meeting the specific beyond the flow reduction requirements for new facilities based primarily on technology-based performance for facilities located in estuaries, tidal intake flow reduction from all cooling requirements defined in the ‘‘fast track’’ rivers, oceans, and the Great Lakes. This water intake structures commensurate (Track I), or by demonstrating that a option was, in part, rejected due to the with zero or very low-level intake (dry level of performance would be achieved potential of delays in permitting. More cooling). This option does not comparable to the level that would be significantly, this option was rejected distinguish between facilities on the achieved under the Track I requirements because closed-cycle recirculating basis of the waterbody from which they under the ‘‘demonstration track’’ (Track cooling water systems are available and withdraw cooling water. Dry cooling II). economically practicable across all systems use either a natural or a Under one of the two-track options waterbody types. mechanical air draft to transfer heat (referred to as the ‘‘preferred two-track’’ from condenser tubes to air. EPA option), EPA considered a fast-track determined that the annual compliance based on a commitment by the facility cost to industry for this option would be to employ a suite of technologies that at least $490 million. EPA also found would represent best technology that the permit writer’s regulatory available for minimizing adverse implementation burden would be of an environmental impact. The technologies
VerDate 11
considered include reduction in impingement mortality and entrainment section 316(b) protective measures for capacity commensurate with that for all life stages of fish and shellfish to the life of the facility. achievable by use of a closed-cycle achieve a level of reduction comparable Under the industry approach, Track II recirculating cooling water system; a to the level that would be achieved would provide an applicant who does velocity limitation of less than or equal under Track I. The estimated annual not want to commit to any of the above to 0.5 ft/s; and location where intake compliance cost to facilities for the technology options with an opportunity capacity would be no more than five (5) preferred two-track option is $47.7 to demonstrate that site-specific percent of the mean annual flow of a million. characteristics, including the local freshwater stream or river, no more than EPA also considered a less stringent biology, would justify another cooling one (1) percent of the tidal excursion variation of the two-track option above, water intake structure technology, such volume of a tidal river or estuary or in which Track I would not require as once-through cooling. For these where the intake capacity would not cooling water intake structures located situations, the applicant could disrupt the natural stratification and in fresh rivers or streams and lakes or demonstrate to the permitting agency, turnover patterns of a lake or reservoir. reservoirs to reduce capacity to a level on the basis of site-specific studies, Applicants also would be required to commensurate with that achievable by either that the proposed intake would conduct baseline biological use of a closed-cycle cooling system. not create an appreciable risk of adverse characterization monitoring; these data EPA did not select this option because environmental impact or, if it would would be used to determine which other available technologies that are create an appreciable risk of adverse design and construction technologies economically practicable achieve greater environmental impact, that the are needed on a case-by-case basis. EPA reduction in impingement and applicant would install technology to also considered allowing the permit entrainment. ‘‘minimize’’ adverse environmental applicant to specify design and EPA also considered a third two-track impact. Such demonstrations would construction technologies and to require option as suggested by industry. Under recognize that some entrainment and monitoring so that the performance of this option, an applicant choosing Track impingement mortality can occur these technologies could be evaluated in I would install ‘‘highly protective’’ without creating ‘‘adverse a subsequent NPDES permit. In order to technologies in return for expedited environmental impact,’’ but, where speed up the issuance of the first permit permitting without the need for pre- there is an appreciable risk of adverse at the new facility, EPA considered operational or operational studies in the environmental impact (e.g., population waiving any mandatory baseline source waterbody. According to the effects), the technology that would biological characterization monitoring commenters, these technologies would ‘‘minimize’’ it would be the technology under Track I. In this case, the applicant ‘‘exceed the section 316(b) standards’’ that maximized net benefits. EPA because they would ‘‘avoid adverse would have the opportunity to rely on determined that the annual compliance environmental impact,’’ defined as and present historical or literature cost to industry for this option would be proven population or ecosystem information to support its selection of $24.9 million. EPA discusses why it is impacts. Such fast-track technologies design and construction technologies. not accepting the industry’s two-track might include technologies that reduce Under this approach, applicants would approach in full in Section V.D below. intake flow to a level commensurate EPA also considered a waterbody- propose what design and construction with a wet closed-cycle cooling at that based two track option. Under this requirements are most appropriate to site and that achieve an average option, Track I would require, reduce impingement and entrainment or approach velocity (measured in front of depending on the waterbody type, to maximize impingement survival the cooling screens or the opening to the screens, fish return systems, or resulting from water withdrawn as cooling water intake structure) of no reduction in capacity to a level make-up water at these facilities. The more than 0.5 ft/s, or any technologies commensurate with that achievable by biological characterization information that achieve a level of protection from use of a closed-cycle cooling system. would support the design and impingement and entrainment within The delineation of waterbody types construction technologies that the the expected range for a closed-cycle would correlate with greater or lesser permittee chose to implement. The cooling (with 0.5 ft/s approach velocity) potential for impingement and Director could revisit these design and given the waterbody type where the entrainment. Under Track II , a permit construction technologies at the time of facility is to be located. This option was applicant would be able to demonstrate permit renewal. (Most design and intended to allow facilities to use how alternative technology performance construction technologies can be standard or new technologies that have measures would reduce impingement implemented without stopping been demonstrated to be effective for the mortality and entrainment for all life operation at the facility.) As an species, type of waterbody, and flow stages of fish and shellfish to a level of alternative to the case-by-case volume of the cooling water intake reduction comparable to the level that designation of design and construction structure proposed for their use. would be achieved under Track I. technologies, EPA also considered Examples of candidate technologies EPA did consider a two-track option designating the following two design include (a) wedgewire screens, where based on dry cooling. EPA did not and construction technologies as part of there is constant flow, as in rivers; (b) promulgate this option for reasons a fast-track, best technology available traveling fine mesh screens with a fish discussed at Section V.C. of this suite of technologies: a fine mesh return system designed to minimize preamble for not adopting dry cooling as traveling screen with a fish return impingement and entrainment; and (c) best technology available for system, variable speed pumps, and a aquatic filter barrier systems, at sites minimizing adverse environmental low pressure spray; or a submerged where they would not be rendered impact. In addition, there are very wedgewire fine mesh screen. ineffective by high flows or fouling. The limited alternatives for achieving a dry Under Track II, a facility would need operator of a proposed new facility cooling-level reduction in impingement to conduct a comprehensive would elect which set of technologies to and entrainment in a second track. EPA demonstration study that documents install and validate its performance as did not select this option because other that an alternative suite of technologies necessary. In return, the permitting available technologies that are can be used by the facility to reduce agency would not require additional economically practicable achieve
VerDate 11
significant reduction in impingement annual flow of a freshwater river or traditional steam electric utility and entrainment at far lower cost. stream, or to maintain the natural industry, facilities located in freshwater thermal stratification or turnover areas that have closed-cycle B. Why EPA Is Establishing EPA’s patterns (where present) of a lake or recirculating cooling water systems can, Preferred Two-Track Option as the Best reservoir except in cases where the depending on the quality of the make- Technology Available for Minimizing disruption is determined to be up water, reduce water use by 96 to 98 Adverse Environmental Impact? beneficial to the management of percent from the amount they would For new facilities subject to this rule, fisheries for fish and shellfish by any use if they had once-through cooling EPA finds that the preferred two-track fishery management agency(ies), or to a water systems. Steam electric generating option represents the best technology percentage of the tidal excursions of a facilities that have closed-cycle available for minimizing adverse tidal river or estuary. In addition, an recirculating cooling water systems environmental impact. With respect to applicant with intake capacity greater using salt water can reduce water usage new facilities, the technologies used as than 10 MGD must select and by 70 to 96 percent when make-up and the basis for this option are implement an appropriate design and blowdown flows are minimized. 31 commercially available and construction technology for minimizing Manufacturing facilities that reuse economically practicable for the impingement mortality and entrainment and recycle water withdrawn from a industries affected as a whole, and have if certain conditions exist. (Applicants water of the U.S. in a manner that acceptable energy impacts. EPA with 2–10 MGD flows are not required reduces intake flow to a level estimates that only nine electric to reduce capacity but must install commensurate with that which can be generators who were planning to install technologies for reducing entrainment at attained by a closed-cycle, recirculating a once-through cooling system will have all locations.) Under Track II, the cooling water system that has to install recirculating wet cooling applicant has the opportunity to minimized make-up and blow down towers as a result of this rule. The demonstrate that impacts to fish and flows will be in accordance with the energy impacts associated with these shellfish, including important forage rule. See § 125.86(b)(1). For purposes of nine facilities is estimated to comprise and predator species, within the this regulation, EPA considers reuse and only 0.026 percent of total new electric watershed will be comparable to these recycling at manufacturing facilities to generating capacity. Similarly, the which you would achieve were you to be equivalent to closed-cycle, technologies used as the basis for this implement the Track I requirements for recirculating cooling water systems at option also have acceptable non-aquatic capacity and design velocity. See steam-electric power plants. environmental impacts. The non-aquatic § 125.84(b)(1) and (2). Proportional flow Although EPA has not projected that environmental impacts associated with requirements also apply under Track II. any once-through electric generating increased air emissions (SO2, NO2, CO2, facilities with an intake capacity of less and Hg) is very small. The increased a. Capacity than 10 MGD will be built in the next SO2, NOX, CO2, and Hg attributed to the In Track I, all new facilities with 20 years, EPA acknowledges that nine facilities that would be required to cooling water intake structures having a projecting the numbers and install recirculating wet cooling towers design intake flow equal to or greater characteristics of facilities over long in lieu of once-through cooling systems than 10 MGD must: timeframes may lead to uncertainties in is negligible in comparison to the total Reduce the total design intake flow to EPA’s analysis. (See Sections 5.1.4 and annual air emissions from new power a level, at a minimum, commensurate 5.2.4 of the Economic Analysis for a plants. EPA finds that the requirements with that which can be attained by a discussion of uncertainties and contained in the preferred two-track closed-cycle recirculating cooling water limitations in EPA’s baseline projections approach meet the requirement of system using minimized make-up and of new facilities.) In the event that such section 316(b) of the CWA that the blowdown flows. facilities might be built in the future (for location, design, construction, and Reducing the cooling water intake example, as a stand-alone, combined- capacity of cooling water intake structure’s capacity is one of the most cycle, cogeneration facility associated structures reflect the best technology effective means of reducing entrainment with a manufacturer), EPA has available for minimizing adverse (and impingement). Capacity includes concluded that the application of the environmental impact. The components the volume of water that can be intake capacity requirements in the of the two-track approach are illustrated withdrawn through a cooling water selected option is not economically in Appendix 1 to this preamble. intake structure over a period of time. practicable for facilities with the Limiting the volume of the water smallest cooling water intake structures, 1. What Are the Performance withdrawn from a waterbody typically those that withdraw less than 10 MGD. Requirements for the Location, Design, reduces the number of aquatic Based on EPA’s estimate, the Construction, and Capacity for Cooling organisms in that waterbody that compliance cost-to-revenue ratio for Water Intake Structures? otherwise would be entrained. Under combined-cycle facilities with these Under the final rule, EPA has adopted Track I, EPA requires that all new flows is 4.9 to 8.8 percent or higher. a two-track approach. Under Track I, for facilities, with intake flows equal to or Even if these facilities installed a facilities with a design intake flow equal greater than 10 MGD, limit their flow to closed-cycle recirculating cooling to or greater than 10 MGD, the capacity a level commensurate with that which system to reduce dynamic flow below of the cooling water intake structure is could be attained by use of a closed- the regulatory threshold for this rule restricted, at a minimum, to a level cycle recirculating cooling water system and avoided all other costs of the rule, commensurate with that which could be using minimized make-up and their cost-to-revenue ratio still would be attained by use of a closed-cycle blowdown flows. See § 125.84 (b)(1). from 2 to 3.2 percent or more (and they recirculating system. Then for facilities Closed-cycle, recirculating cooling with a design intake flow equal to or water systems are known to reduce the 31 The lower range would be appropriate where greater than 2 MGD, the design through- amount of cooling water needed and in State water quality standards limit chloride to a maximum increase of 10 percent over background screen intake velocity is restricted to 0.5 turn to directly reduce the number of and therefore require a 1.1 cycle of concentration. ft/s and the total quantity of intake is aquatic organisms entrained in the The higher range may be attained where cycles of restricted to a proportion of the mean cooling water intake structure. For the concentration up to 2.0 are used for the design.
VerDate 11
still might have to bear additional cost flow, it is most easily addressed during appropriate level of protection for to comply with requirements the the design and construction phase of a aquatic organisms. This study Director establishes on a case-by-case cooling water intake structure. concluded that appropriate velocity basis). EPA’s analysis shows that the Alternatively, the facility can install thresholds should be based on the costs for all such facilities generally certain hard technologies (e.g., fishes’ swimming speeds (which are would be far above the range of impacts wedgewire screens and velocity caps) to related to the length of the fish) and for facilities above 10 MGD, which have, change the configuration of the structure endurance (which varies seasonally and compliance cost to-revenue ratios at or so that the effects of velocity on aquatic is related to water quality). The data below 0.5 percent for more than 70 organisms are minimized. presented showed that the species and facilities, between 2 and 3 percent for Under Track I, for a facility with a life stages evaluated could endure a only six facilities, and above 3 percent design intake flows equal to or greater velocity of 1.0 ft/s. To develop a for only 3 facilities. EPA believes that than 2 MGD, the final regulation threshold that could be applied the economic impact of complying with requires that the maximum design nationally and is effective at preventing the rule would be disproportionate for through-screen velocity at each cooling impingement of most species of fish at electric generating facilities with flows water intake structure, be no more than their different life stages, EPA applied a below 10 MGD. Thus, the Agency is 0.5 ft/s. See § 125.84(b)(2). The design safety factor of two to the 1.0 ft/s exercising its discretion under section through-screen velocity is defined as the threshold to derive a threshold of 0.5 316(b) of the CWA to determine what is value assigned during the design phase ft/s. This safety factor, in part, is meant economically practicable and is creating of a cooling water intake structure to the to ensure protection when screens specific requirements in Track I average speed at which intake water become partly occluded by debris available to facilities with flows passes through the open area of the during operation and velocity increases between 2 and 10 MGD. See § 125.84(c). intake screen (taking fouling into through portions of the screen that These facilities are required to meet the account) or other device against which remain open. EPA compiled the data same velocity, proportional flow, and organisms might be impinged or from three studies on fish swim speeds the design and construction technology through which they might be entrained. (University of Washington study, requirements for impingement that To develop an appropriate minimum Turnpenny, and EPRI) into a graph. The apply in § 125.84(b). See § 125.84(c)(1), velocity requirement at cooling water data suggest that a 0.5 ft/s velocity (2) and (3). However, they are not intake structures that will be effective in would protect 96 percent of the tested required to reduce intake flow contributing to the overall reduction in fish. EPA recognizes that there may be commensurate with use of a closed- impingement, EPA reviewed available specific circumstances and species for cycle recirculating cooling system. literature, State and Federal guidance, which the 0.5 ft/s requirement might not and regulatory requirement. EPA found Instead, they are required use design be sufficiently effective. When issuing that an approach velocity of 0.5 ft/s has and construction technologies for NPDES permits, the permit directors been used as guidance in at least three minimizing entrainment at all locations. will need to comply with any applicable Federal documents. 32 33 34 The 0.5 ft/s See 125.84(c)(4). EPA believes that the requirements under the Endangered approach velocity threshold requirements of § 125.84(c) are an Species Act (ESA). Both the National recommended in the Federal documents economically practicable way for these Marine Fisheries Service and the is based on a study of fish swimming facilities to reduce impingement California Department of Fish and Game speeds and endurance performed by mortality and entrainment. EPA has have developed fish screen velocity Sonnichsen et al. (1973).35 This study 36 37 38 made similar decisions in establishing criteria. Under section 510 of the was based on an unknown number of technology-based effluent limitations Clean Water Act (CWA) States may individuals from about 30 different guidelines and standards under 301 and impose additional requirements species of fish and eels, with many of pursuant to State law. When EPA issues 306, see e.g., Texas Oil & Gas Ass’n v. the data for adult fish. The three Federal U.S. EPA, 161 F.3d 923, 940 (5th Cir. an NPDES permit, States may condition documents recommending a 0.5 ft/s the permit pursuant to their certification 1998) (Court upheld EPA’s intake velocity often referred to one subcategorization for Cook Inlet based authority under section 401 of the CWA. another or had no references. The lack Two velocities are of importance in upon disproportionate economic of abundant and diverse data led EPA to impact). the assessment and design of cooling adopt a safety factor to ensure an water intake structures: the approach b. Design and Construction velocity and the through-screen or Technologies 32 Boreman, J. 1977. Impacts of power plant through-technology velocity. The intake velocities on fish. Power Plant Team, U.S. i. Velocity Fish and Wildlife Service. approach velocity is the velocity 33 measured just in front of the screen face Intake velocity is one of the key Christianson, A. G., F. H. Rainwater, M.A. Shirazi, and B.A. Tichenor. 1973. Reviewing or at the opening of the cooling water factors that can affect the impingement environmental impact statements: power plant intake structure in the surface water of fish and other aquatic biota. In the cooling systems, engineering aspects, U.S. source, and is biologically the most immediate area of the intake structure, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Pacific important velocity. The design through- the velocity of water entering a cooling Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, Technical Series Report EPA– screen or through-technology velocity is water intake structure exerts a direct 660/2–73–016. the velocity measured through the physical force against which fish and 34 King, W. Instructional Memorandum RB–44: screen face or just as the organisms are other organisms must act to avoid Review of NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge impingement or entrainment. EPA Elimination System) permit applications processed by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) or 36 National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest considers velocity to be an important by the State with EPA oversight.’’ In: U.S. Fish and Region. 1995. Juvenile Fish Screen Criteria. factor that can be controlled for Wildlife Service Navigable Waters Handbook. 37 National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest minimizing adverse environmental 35 Sonnichsen, J.C., Bentley, G.F. Bailey, and R.E. Region. 1997. Fish Screening Criteria for impact at cooling water intake Nakatani. 1973. A review of thermal power plant Anadromous Salmonids. Published on the Internet intake structure designs and related environmental at http://swr.ucsd.edu/hcd/fishscrn.htm (access structures. Because velocity can be considerations. Hanford Engineering Development date). minimized through appropriate design Laboratory, Richland, Washington, HEDL–TME 73– 38 California Department of Fish and Game. 1997. of the intake structure relative to intake 24, UC–12. Fish screening criteria.
VerDate 11
passing through the opening into system, the rule requires these facilities As used in these provisions, another device (e.g., entering the to select and install design and ‘‘minimize’’ means to reduce to the opening of a velocity cap). The through- construction technologies at all smallest amount, extent, or degree screen velocity is always greater than locations. See § 125.84(c)(3) and (4). reasonably possible. See § 125.83. the approach velocity because the net EPA is requiring these technologies in Technologies that minimize open area is smaller. Track I because they are technically impingement mortality and entrainment For this final rule, EPA uses the available, economically practicable and of all life stages of fish and shellfish at design through-screen velocity as a they effectively further reduce a location might include, but are not component of best technology for impingement mortality and entrainment limited to, intake screens, such as fine minimizing adverse environmental at new facilities that choose to locate in mesh screens and aquatic filter barrier impact. EPA anticipates that design areas where fish and shellfish resources systems, that exclude smaller organisms through-screen velocity will be simpler need additional protection. EPA notes from entering the cooling water intake to calculate, and monitor (via that facilities with closed-cycle structure; passive intake systems such measurement of head loss) and be more recirculating cooling systems can still as wedgewire screens, perforated pipes, accurate than measuring approach withdraw large volumes of cooling porous dikes, and artificial filter beds; velocity. The approach velocity is a water, particularly if they operate in and diversion and/or avoidance systems point function. When the cross-section brackish or other waters where high that guide fish away from the intake of an intake structure is large, the rates of recirculation cannot be before they are impinged or entrained. approach velocity will not be the same achieved, and may still impinge or In some cases, technologies that might at all points across all points in a single entrain large numbers of aquatic be used to achieve the 0.5 ft/s velocity cross-section. The approach velocity organisms. Thus, EPA believes that standard at § 125.85(b)(2) and varies depending on where it is facilities that choose to locate in areas § 125.85(c)(1), such as passive intake measured: how far from the surface, where fish and shellfish need additional systems, might also minimize how far in front of the screen, or the protection should install these impingement mortality and location across the screen. Approach technologies to further reduce entrainment. velocity also varies with the number of impingement mortality and Some technologies minimize measurements taken; is 1 taken, or 10? entrainment. impingement mortality by maximizing Furthermore, it is much easier to design In the Track I requirements at the survival of impinged organisms. the intake structure to achieve a specific § 125.84(c), which apply to facilities These technologies include, but are not through-screen velocity. EPA notes that with cooling water intakes between 2 limited to, fish-handling systems such design through-screen velocity will be and 10 MGD that choose not to meet the as bypass systems, fish buckets, fish easier to implement because a number capacity reduction requirements in baskets, fish troughs, fish elevators, fish of technologies use it as the standard § 125.84(b), the rule requires these pumps, spray wash systems, and fish measure for intake design. In facilities to meet the same design and sills. These technologies either divert conjunction with the design intake construction requirements for organisms away from impingement at velocity requirement, EPA requires new minimizing impingement mortality as the intake structure, or collect impinged facilities to monitor the head loss across are required for facilities withdrawing organisms and protect them from further the screens or other technology on a greater than 10 MGD, See § 125.84(c)(3). damage so that they can be transferred quarterly basis. See § 125.87(b). EPA These impingement requirements apply back to the source water at a point requires that head loss across the if the facility locates where fish and removed from the facility intake and screens (or other appropriate shellfish resources need additional discharge points. measurements for technologies other protection. Facilities between 2 and 10 Some additional design and than intake screens) be monitored and MGD that choose not to meet the construction technologies have correlated with intake velocity once the capacity reduction requirements in feasibility issues limiting their use to facility is operating. § 125.84(b), however, must install certain types of locations. Some have design and construction technologies for not been used on a widespread basis ii. Other Design and Construction reducing entrainment at all locations. above certain intake flow rates. The Technologies See § 125.84(c)(4). EPA makes this effectiveness of these technologies also The final rule requires facilities distinction because, for economic may vary depending on factors such as withdrawing more than 10 MGD that practicality reasons, today’s rule does the speed and variability in direction of choose Track I to select and install not require smaller new facilities to currents in a waterbody, the degree of design and construction technologies for reduce intake flow commensurate with debris loading at a location, etc. Because minimizing impingement mortality and/ a closed-cycle recirculating cooling of these issues, EPA has not established or entrainment if they locate in certain system. In this case, EPA believes that a national performance standard for areas where fish or shellfish resources use of design and construction these technologies more specific than to need additional protection. See technologies is an alternative, require the applicant to study literature § 125.84(b)(4) and (5). Facilities economically practicable and and available physical and biological withdrawing between 2 and 10 MGD technically available means for reducing data on their proposed location, and may meet a different set of Track I entrainment. then to select and install technology(ies) requirements. See § 125.84(c). If they Today’s rule does not require facilities that minimize impingement mortality choose to do so, the rule specifies that choosing Track II to install design and and entrainment. (As stated above, they must meet the same design and construction technologies as specified ‘‘minimize’’ is defined as a reduction construction requirements to reduce under 125.84(b)(4) and (5) or ‘‘to the smallest amount, extent or impingement as applies to facilities 125.84(c)(3) and (4). EPA believes that degree reasonably possible.’’) withdrawing greater than 10 MGD. such facilities will use these In Track I of the final rule, EPA does However, to reduce entrainment, technologies, at least in part, to meet the not require an applicant that installs instead of requiring a reduction in Track II comparability requirements at design and construction technology(ies) intake flow commensurate with use of a 125.84(c)(1) and thus achieve to seek the approval of the Director closed-cycle recirculating cooling water comparable performance. regarding which design and
VerDate 11
construction technology(ies) it selects, notes that ‘‘minimize’’ is defined as a Although today’s rule does not nor does EPA require the applicant to reduction ‘‘to the smallest amount, specifically establish location conduct biological monitoring prior to extent or degree reasonably possible.’’) requirements, several components of the submitting its application. Rather, to EPA believes the above framework two-track approach inherently consider avoid permitting delays Track I only reasonably balances its interest in location as a factor. Under Track I, requires the applicant to gather and minimizing permit delays with its location is a consideration when the present historical information and/or interest in ensuring that applicants applicant selects and implements the literature to support its decision on willing to take more time and engage in design and construction technologies for which design and construction a dialogue with the Director may have minimizing impingement and technology(ies) to implement at the new an opportunity to reduce their costs. As entrainment and maximizing facility. See § 125.86(b)(4). a general matter, EPA strongly impingement survival. In addition, EPA Because an applicant does not need encourages permit applicants to consult estimated that in order to meet the the Director’s approval of its design and with the Director prior to selecting and proportional flow requirements in Track construction technology(ies) prior to the installing design and construction I and Track II, facilities may need to site first permit, EPA has included a technology(ies). Today’s rule, however, in locations that can support their water provision that requires the Director to requires no such consultation, and, as withdrawals or find other alternatives, determine, at each permit reissuance, discussed elsewhere in this preamble, such as, obtaining water from ground whether design and construction EPA’s costing analysis conservatively water, grey water, or a public water technologies at the facility are assumes that permittees will install supply system. Under Track II, the new minimizing impingement mortality and/ additional design and construction facility may choose location as a key or entrainment, See § 125.89(a)(2). This technologies at all locations. component for minimizing provision is intended to ensure that the EPA recognizes that the condition of impingement and entrainment. Under applicant selects and installs biological resources at a location may Track II, an applicant has the appropriate technology(ies). change over time. The requirement for opportunity to conduct site-specific The framework of these provisions the Director to review the applicant’s studies to demonstrate that alternative balances a number of factors. One is design and construction technologies at technologies or configurations, EPA’s interest in ensuring that permit reissuance provides an including the relocation of an intake to applicants seeking their first permit opportunity for any appropriate changes areas of less sensitivity, will reduce under Track I can quickly obtain one in the design and construction impingement mortality and entrainment without delay and, if they wish, without technologies used at the location. See for all life stages of fish and shellfish to engaging in a dialogue with the Director § 125.89(a)(2). a level of reduction comparable to the about whether additional design and c. Location level that would be achieved were the construction technologies are needed at applicant to implement the technology- their site, or which technologies will Although EPA recognizes that the based performance requirements in reasonably reduce impingement location of a cooling water intake Track I. mortality and entrainment at the structure can be a factor that affects the In addition, this new facility rule also location. In this case, an applicant may environmental impact caused by the regulates location as a performance wish to install some of the more highly intake structure, today’s final rule, apart characteristic of new facilities to protective additional design and from the proportional flow minimize entrainment and other construction technologies, to minimize requirements, does not include specific adverse environmental impacts that are any opportunity for disagreement with national requirements for new facilities likely to occur as a result of the the Director at permit reissuance about based on location of the cooling water withdrawal of makeup water even whether the applicant chose intake structure. In EPA’s view, the where a facility uses recirculating technologies that ‘‘minimize’’ optimal design requirement for location systems. Historically, some previous impingement mortality and entrainment is to place the inlet of the cooling water CWA section 316(b) studies conducted at their location. intake structure in an area of the source for permits proceedings have considered Alternatively, an applicant under waterbody where impingement and potential impacts from facilities whose § 125.84(b) who is willing to take the entrainment of organisms are minimized cooling water intake flow is large in time to engage in a dialogue with the by locating intakes away from areas proportion to the source water flow or with the potential for high productivity Director prior to the first permit under tidal volume. 39 40 41 Under this rule, (taking into account the location of the Track I may be able to obtain the §§ 125.84(b)(3), 125.84(c)(2), and shoreline, the depth of the waterbody, Director’s concurrence on a finding that 125.84(d)(2), EPA establishes and the presence and quantity of aquatic the proposed intake will not be located proportional flow requirements for new organisms or sensitive habitat). EPA in an area where fish or shellfish facility cooling water intake structures received significant and convincing resources need additional protection. located in freshwater rivers and streams, comments arguing against the specific See § 125.84(b)(4) and (5) for a list of lakes and reservoirs, and estuaries and such areas. In this case, the applicant proposed requirements and feasibility may not need to install any additional for locations based on waterbody type 39 Lewis, Randall B. and Greg Seegert. design and construction technologies. In and location within the waterbody. Entrainment and Impingement Studies at two the event that the location of the intake Among other things, commenters argued Power Plants on the Wabash River in Indiana. structure is such that additional that EPA’s proposed requirements Power Plants & Aquatic Resources: Issues and Assessment. Environmental Science & Policy. technologies are required, an applicant would be difficult to implement and Volume 3, Supplement 1. September 2000. who is willing to take the time to relied on generalizations about types of 40 Public Service Indiana. 316(b) Demonstration consult with the Director prior to the waterbodies that were too simplistic. for the Cayuga and Wabash River Generating first permit under Track I may be able See section VI.C for further discussion Stations. Prepared by Dames and Moore, Cincinnati, to obtain the Director’s concurrence that of comments and EPA’s responses Ohio. August 30, 1997. 41 Public Service Company of Indiana. A 316(b) technologies that are less costly than the regarding location. This topic is Study and Impact Assessment for the Cayuga most highly-protective ones available discussed further in Chapter 5 of the Generating Station. Prepared by EA Science and are sufficient for its location. (EPA again Technical Development Document. Technology, Northbrook, IL. April 1988.
VerDate 11
tidal rivers, requiring that the total influence of the intake will move back commensurately reducing the design intake flow from all cooling and forth near the intake and that entrainment of aquatic organisms. water intake structures at a facility withdrawing 1 percent of the volume of d. Additional and Alternative Best withdrawing: water surrounding the intake twice a Technology Available Requirements • From a freshwater river or stream day over time would diminish the must be no greater than five (5) percent aquatic life surrounding the intake. The At § 125.84(e), the final rule of the source waterbody mean annual 5 percent value for rivers and streams recognizes that a State may, under flow; reflects an estimate that this would sections 401 or 510 of the CWA, ensure • From a lake or reservoir must not entrain approximately 5 percent of the the inclusion of any more stringent disrupt the natural thermal stratification river or stream’s entrainable organisms requirements relating to the location, or turnover pattern (where present) of and a policy judgment that a greater design, construction, and capacity of a the source water except in cases where degree of entrainment reflects an cooling water intake structure at a new the disruption is determined to be inappropriately located facility. Because facility that are necessary to ensure beneficial to the management of they are overwhelmingly achievable for attainment of water quality standards, fisheries for fish and shellfish by any new facilities, EPA believes they are including designated uses, criteria, and fishery management agency(ies); appropriate to this new facility rule. antidegradation requirements. • From estuaries or tidal rivers must EPA interprets the CWA to authorize Proportional flow limitations are one be no greater than one (1) percent of the State and Tribal permit authorities to way to provide protection for aquatic volume of the water column in the area require more stringent limitations on life and enhancement of commercial centered about the opening of the intake intake where necessary to protect any and recreational uses of source waters. with a diameter defined by the distance provision of State law, including State Larger proportionate withdrawals of of one tidal excursion at the mean low water quality standards. Commenters water may result in commensurately water level. have asserted that EPA does not have greater levels of entrainment. EPA finds these proportional flow such authority under CWA section Entrainment impacts of cooling water limitations to represent limitations on 301(b)(1)(C), arguing that authority is intake structures are closely linked to capacity and location that are limited to controls on discharges of the amount of water passing through the technically available and economically pollutants. Leaving that question open, intake structure, because the eggs and practicable for the industry as a whole. there is ample authority under CWA larvae of some aquatic species are free- EPA examined the performance of sections 510 and 401, as is consistent floating and may be drawn with the existing facilities based on section 308 with the goals of the CWA articulated in flow of cooling water into an intake questionnaire data in terms of section 101 of the CWA, to provide EPA structure. Sizable proportional proportional flow in order to determine ample authority for such a provision. withdrawals from a stream or river what additional value could be used as Section 510 of the CWA provides, in might also change the physical character a safeguard to protect source waters relevant part: against entrainment, especially in of the affected reach of the river and smaller waterbodies or in waterbodies availability of suitable habitat, Except as provided in this Chapter, nothing in this chapter shall (1) preclude or deny the where the intake is disproportionately potentially affecting the environmental or ecological value to the aquatic right of any State or political subdivision large as compared to the source water therefore * * * to adopt or enforce * * * (B) body. (In practice, EPA expects that organisms. In lakes or reservoirs, the any requirement respecting control or these requirements would require a proportional flow requirement limits the abatement of pollution * * * except that if facility to relocate or obtain water from total design intake flow to a threshold an * * * other limitation * * * or standard another source, e.g., a public water below which it will not disrupt the of performance is in effect under this chapter, supply or groundwater, only in smaller natural thermal (and dissolved oxygen) such State * * * may not adopt or enforce waterbodies, because no new facilities stratification and turnover pattern any * * * other limitation * * * or standard (where present) of the source water of performance which is less stringent than in larger waterbodies that use wet the * * * other limitation * * * or standard recirculating cooling systems would except in cases where the disruption is of performance under this chapter. ever run afoul of these requirements.) In determined to be beneficial to the order to assess the performance of new management of fisheries for fish and EPA interprets this to reserve for the facilities in meeting these requirements, shellfish by any fishery management States the authority to implement EPA examined the performance of agency(ies). See § 125.84(b)(3)(ii). The requirements that are more stringent existing facilities and determined that proportional flow requirement for lakes than the Federal requirements under 90 percent of existing facilities in and reservoirs would primarily protect state law. PUD No. I of Jefferson County freshwater rivers and streams and 92 aquatic organisms in small to medium- v. Washington Dep’t of Ecology, 511 percent of existing facilities in estuaries sized lakes and reservoirs by limiting U.S. 700, 705 (1994). (As recognized by or tidal rivers meet these requirements. the intake flow to a capacity appropriate section 510 of the Clean Water Act, 33 Based on documents included in the for the size of the waterbody. In U.S.C. 1370, States may develop water record, EPA also believes that most estuaries and tidal rivers, EPA’s quality standards more stringent than existing facilities meet the proportional proportional flow requirement uses a required by this regulation.). Further, flow requirement for lakes and volume that relates specifically to the section 401(d) of the CWA provides, in reservoirs. EPA expects that new cooling water intake structure and the relevant part, facilities would have even more area it influences (see § 125.83). Any certification provided under this potential to plan ahead to select Organisms in this area of influence section shall set forth any effluent limitations locations and design intake capacity travel back and forth with the tides and and other limitations, and monitoring that meet these requirements. EPA so may be exposed to the intake requirements necessary to assure that any recognizes that these requirements are multiple times. The proportional flow applicant for a Federal license or permit will comply with any applicable effluent conservative in order to account for the requirement for estuaries and tidal limitations and other limitations, under cumulative impact of multiple facilities’ rivers will limit the withdrawal of a section 1311 or 1312 of this title, standard of intakes. The 1 percent value for sizable proportion of the organisms performance under 1316 of this title, or estuaries reflects that the area under within the area of influence, prohibition, effluent standard, or
VerDate 11
pretreatment standard under section 1317 of intake capacity. To examine the extent technology-based performance this title, and with any other appropriate to which new manufacturing facilities requirements as for other steam electric requirement of state law set forth in such are likely to reuse and recycle cooling generating facilities. The condensing of certification, and shall become a condition water, the Agency reviewed the excess steam from cogeneration is the on any Federal license or permit subject to the provisions of this section.’’ engineering databases that support the same process at manufacturers as at effluent limitations guidelines for utility and nonutility power plants. In PUD No. I of Jefferson County v. several categories of industrial point Therefore, EPA does not distinguish Dep’t of Ecology, 511 U.S. 700, 711 sources. In general, this review between requirements for this activity. (1994), the Supreme Court held that this identified extensive use of recycling or For the purposes of this regulation, provision is not ‘‘specifically tied to a reuse of cooling water in documents EPA considers the withdrawal of water ‘discharge’.’’ (‘‘The text refers to the summarizing industrial practices in the for use and reuse as both process and compliance of the applicant, not the late 1970s and early 1980s, as well as cooling water analogous to the discharge. Section 401(d) thus allows increased recycling and reuse of cooling reduction of cooling water intake flows the State to impose ‘other limitations’ water in the 1990s. For example, the achieved through the use of a on the project in general to assure reuse of cooling water in the recirculating cooling water system. For compliance with various provisions of manufacturing processes was identified example, some facilities transfer excess the Clean Water Act and with ‘‘any in the pulp and paper and chemicals process heat to a water stream and other appropriate requirement of State industries, in some cases as part of the subsequently reuse the heated stream law.’’) Thus, section 401(d) provides basis for an overall zero discharge for other process purposes. In this case states with ample authority in their 401 requirement (inorganic chemicals). there is considerable conservation of certifications to require EPA to include Other facilities reported reuse of a water and energy by the reuse of cooling any more stringent limitations in order portion of the cooling water that was water. Alternatively, some facilities to meet the requirements of state law. eventually discharged as process often withdraw water first for a process These two sections of the CWA further wastewater, with some noncontact application and subsequently reuse it as the objectives of the act to ‘‘restore and cooling water discharged through a cooling water. EPA encourages such maintain the chemical, physical, and separate outfall or after mixing with practices and, in turn, considers these biological integrity of the nation’s treated process water. techniques analogous to flow reduction waters,’’ the interim goal to protect For manufacturing facilities, flow for the purposes of meeting the capacity water quality and are consistent with reduction techniques differ between reduction requirements of this rule. To the CWA policy to ‘‘recognize, preserve, facilities and industry sectors. Facilities meet the intake capacity requirements at and protect the primary responsibility use unheated noncontact cooling water § 125.84(b)(1) a new manufacturing and rights of States to prevent, reduce, for condensing of excess steam facility must, to the maximum extent and eliminate pollution’’ and ‘‘to plan produced via cogeneration; they use practicable, reuse and recycle cooling the development and use * * * of water unheated contact and noncontact water withdrawn for purposes other resources.’’ CWA sections 101(a) and cooling water for in-process needs; and than steam electric condensing. Cooling (b). they frequently reuse process waters water intake used for the purposes of 2. What Technologies Are Available To and wastewaters for contact and condensing of exhaust steam from Meet the Regulatory Requirements noncontact cooling. electricity generation must be reduced The chemical and allied products a. Track I: Capacity to a level commensurate with that sector and the petroleum refining sector which can be attained by a closed-cycle The technical availability of the two- demonstrate similar cooling water recirculating cooling water system using track option is demonstrated by practices. Both sectors utilize cooling minimized make-up and blowdown information in EPA’s record showing water for condensing of excess steam flows. EPA concludes that for that each component of Track I, the from cogeneration and for critical manufacturers the capacity requirement ‘‘fast-track’’ option, can be achieved process needs. Most process cooling meets the criterion of best technology through the use of demonstrated water is noncontact cooling water and available commercially at an technologies. Intake capacity reduction generally is not reused as process water economically practicable cost. commensurate with use of a wet closed- (though it may be recirculated). Paper cycle recirculating cooling system as and allied products facilities generally b. Track I: Velocity required by § 125.84(b)(1) can be reuse cooling water and cogenerated EPA examined the technical achieved using a recirculating wet steam throughout their processes feasibility of the required through- cooling tower or cooling pond. Such a (though the level to which this occurs screen velocity of 0.5 ft/s. This closed-cycle recirculating cooling differs among facilities). Primary metals requirement relies on the appropriate system is a commonly practiced industries utilize cooling water for design of the intake structure relative to technology among the new facilities contact and noncontact cooling and for intake flow to reduce velocity or controlled by this rule. The Technical condensation of steam from onsite installation of certain hard technologies Development Document shows that 67 electric power generation. Contrary to (e.g., wedgewire screens and velocity percent of new in-scope facilities (10 the other sectors, the primary metals caps) to change the configuration of the new coal-fired power plants, 64 new industries have no general purpose for structure so that the effects of velocity combined-cycle power plants, and 7 cogenerated steam in their processes. on aquatic organisms are minimized. manufacturing facilities) would install a In general, the cooling requirement for EPA’s record demonstrates that these closed-cycle recirculating cooling cogeneration in these manufacturing designs and technologies are widely system independently of this rule. sectors is less than for the same power used in the industries subject to this While manufacturers use closed-cycle generated by utility and nonutility rule. Since there are a number of intake recirculating cooling systems to a lesser power plants. Regardless of this fact, technologies currently in use that are extent than do electric power this rule requires that the intake of designed to meet a 0.5 ft/s through- generators, manufacturers also have water used for this purpose (and not screen velocity, the technologies that opportunities to recycle or reuse their reused as process water) must be can achieve the Track I velocity cooling water to reduce their water minimized according to the same technology-based performance
VerDate 11
requirement meet the criterion of best demonstrate reduction of impingement technologies for cooling water intake technology available commercially at an mortality and entrainment for all life structures can achieve the level of economically practicable cost. stages of fish and shellfish to a level of reduction in impingement and The Agency also reviewed the data reduction comparable to the level that entrainment required under Track II. from the section 316(b) industry survey would be achieved under Track I using For example, technologies such as fine with respect to the velocity requirement lower-cost alternative technologies. and wide-mesh wedgewire screens, as § 125.84(b)(2). The preliminary results Under 125.84(d), new facilities that well as aquatic filter barrier systems, suggest that more than two-thirds of choose to comply under Track II must have been shown to reduce mortality combined cycle and coal-fired electric reduce impacts to fish and shellfish, from impingement by up to 99 percent generating facilities built within the past including important forage and predator or greater compared with conventional 15 years would meet the velocity species, within the watershed to a level once-through systems. In addition, other requirement. These currently operating comparable to that which would be types of barrier nets may achieve facilities demonstrate that a design achieved were they to implement the reductions in impingement of 80 to 90 intake velocity of 0.5 ft/s is achievable requirements of § 125.84(b)(1), and (2) percent, and modified screens and fish and provides for sufficient cooling water under Track I.42 EPA does not consider return systems, fish diversion systems, withdrawal. this requirement to mandate exactly the and fine mesh traveling screens and fish c. Track I: Other Design and same level of reduction in impingement return systems have achieved Construction Technologies and entrainment as would be achieved reductions in impingement mortality under Track I. Rather, given the ranging from 60 to 90 percent greater EPA also examined the technology numerous factors that must be than conventional once-through availability of the design and considered to determine the required systems. Similarly, although there is construction requirements at level of reduction in impingement and less available full scale performance § 125.84(b)(4) and (5) in the final rule. entrainment for Track II and the data regarding entrainment, aquatic While EPA costed this requirement complexity inherent in assessing the filter barrier systems, fine mesh based on the assumption that a facility level of performance of different control wedgewire screens, and fine mesh would install cylindrical wedgewire technologies, EPA believes it is traveling screens with fish return screen, or fish return systems on appropriate for a new facility following systems have in certain places been traveling screens, EPA’s record Track II to achieve reductions in shown to achieve 80 to 90 percent demonstrates that there are a number of impingement and entrainment that are greater reduction in mortality from potentially effective design and 90 percent or greater of the levels entrainment compared with construction intake technologies achieved under Track I. EPA believes conventional once-through systems. available for installation at cooling this approach is reasonable for the Examples of effective use of water intake structures for minimizing several reasons. technologies that reduce impingement adverse environmental impact. The New facility determinations regarding and/or entrainment include: intake technologies that new facilities flow or impingement and entrainment • Studies from 1996 to 2001 at Lovett may consider are in one of four under Track I or Track II are, by Station (New York) show no obvious categories that include, but are not necessity, estimates based on available impingement/contact mortality using limited to, data as well as certain assumptions. • aquatic filter barrier systems; Intake screen systems: single-entry, Such estimates have substantial value • Fine mesh (0.5 mm) screen single-exit vertical traveling screens; but cannot reasonably be expected to performance to reduce entrainment has modified traveling screens (Ristroph achieve a high level of precision. This consistently improved at Big Bend Units screens); single-entry, single-exit is particularly true where, as here, 3 and 4 (Florida) with better inclined traveling screens; single-entry, impingement and entrainment rates surveillance and maintenance, double-exit vertical traveling screens; must be correlated with reductions in including biweekly cleaning of screens double-entry, single-exit vertical flow (which are themselves estimated), to prevent biofouling. The operator’s traveling screens (dual-flow screens); reductions in intake velocity, and other 1988 monitoring data show an horizontal traveling screens; fine mesh design and construction requirements. It efficiency in screening fish eggs screens mounted on traveling screens; also is important to recognize that the (primarily drum and bay anchovy) horizontal drum screens; vertical drum efficacies of different design and exceeding 95 percent. For fish larvae screens; rotating disk screens; and fixed construction technologies also are based (primarily drum, bay anchovies, screens. • on estimates that are inexact due to data blennies, and gobies), it was about 86 Passive intake systems: wedgewire limitations, variations in ambient percent. Latent survival of fish eggs has screens, perforated pipes, perforated conditions, and the presence or absence improved to 65 to 80 percent for drum, plates, porous dikes, artificial filter of different species, among other factors. and 66 to 93 percent for bay anchovy; beds, and leaky dams. Available data suggests that • At the Brunswick Station (North • Diversion or avoidance systems: alternative design and construction Carolina), 1 mm fine mesh screens have louvers, velocity caps, barrier nets, air been used on two of four traveling bubble barriers, electrical barriers, light 42 These Track I provisions require that the new screens (only when temperatures are barriers, sound barriers, cable and chain facility reduce its intake flow, at a minimum, to a less than 18 degrees C). Total reduction barriers, aquatic filter barrier systems, level commensurate with that which can be of fish entrained by the fine mesh versus and water jet curtains. attained by a closed-cycle recirculating cooling • water system; desgin and construct each cooling conventional screens has been found to Fish handling systems: fish pumps, water intake structure to a maximum through- lift baskets, fish bypasses, fish baskets, be 84 percent; screen design intake velocity of 0.5 ft/s; and select • Wedgewire screens with slot sizes fish returns, fish troughs, and screen and implement design and construction washes. technologies (e.g., wedgewire screens, fine mesh of one, two, and three millimeter were screens, fish handling and return systems, barriers studied by the State of Maryland at the d. Track II: Alternative Technologies nets, acquatic filter barrier systems) to minimize Chalk Point Station. One millimeter impingement and entrainment of all life stages of EPA also notes that certain facilities fish and shellfish and to maximize survival of screens led to 80 percent exclusion of following Track II may be able to impinged life stages of fish and shellfish. all species, including larvae. For fish
VerDate 11
with greater than 10 mm length, requirement for cooling water intake congregation and growth of aquatic entrainment was eliminated.43 structure location is to place the inlet in organisms; the propagation of the early Several additional factors suggest that an area of the source waterbody where life stages of aquatic organisms (e.g., these performance levels can be impingement and entrainment of planktonic stages); and any life stage of improved upon. First, some of the organisms are minimized, i.e., taking a threatened or endangered species. cooling water intake structure into account: the physical and chemical Examples of these sensitive areas would technology performance data reviewed characteristics of the waterbody; the include (but are not limited to) critical is from the 1970’s and 1980’s and does presence and location of sensitive nursery areas, spawning grounds, not reflect recent developments and habitats; and the composition, important migratory pathways, refuge innovation (e.g., aquatic filter barrier abundance, and spatial/temporal areas, and essential fish habitats. Other systems, sound barriers). Second, the presence of aquatic organisms. It is well factors to consider in the intake siting conventional barrier and return system known that there are certain areas process include the proximity to: technologies characterized above have within every waterbody with increased aquatic sanctuaries/refuges; national not been optimized on a widespread biological productivity, and therefore parks, seashores and monuments; level to date, as would be encouraged by where the potential for impingement wilderness areas; areas of environmental this rule. Such optimization can be best and entrainment of organisms is greater concern or outstanding natural resource achieved by new facilities, which can (e.g., littoral zone in lakes, shore zone in waters; and coral reefs. Conversely, match site conditions to available rivers, nearshore coastal waters in potential examples of less-sensitive technologies. Third, EPA believes that oceans). Examples include the areas may include: areas outside of the many facilities could achieve further following. limnetic zone (i.e., no light penetration); reductions (estimated 15–30 percent) in • Near the Fort Calhoun Station on areas of significant oxygen depletion; impingement and entrainment by the Missouri River, transect studies in and areas proven to have low densities providing for seasonal flow restrictions, 1974 to 1977 indicated higher densities of organisms. variable speed pumps, and other of fish larvae along the cutting bank of innovative flow reduction alternatives. the river adjacent to the Station’s intake f. Track II: Restoration structure and lower densities at the mid- The purpose of section 316(b) is to e. Track II: Location channel location. While densities of fish minimize adverse environmental impact New facilities seeking to comply larvae changed throughout the three from cooling water intake structures. under Track II can use the location of month data collection period, the Restoration measures that result in the their cooling water intake structures to densities collected from the mid performance comparable to that achieve further reductions in channel remained substantially less achieved in Track I further this objective impingement and entrainment. Location than those in the cutting bank while offering a significant degree of of the cooling water intake structure can location.44 flexibility to both permitting authorities be addressed during the planning and • Catches of young striped bass from and facilities. design phases of new facility Suisun Bay near the Pittsburg Power EPA recognizes that restoration construction. At that time, it may be Plant (May to July 1976) ranged from measures have been used at existing possible to choose a particular 0.062/m3 to 0.496/m3 in the center facilities implementing section 316(b) waterbody type and a specific location channel, and from 0.082/m3 to 0.648/m3 on a case-by-case, best professional on that waterbody where (considering along the north shore. Weekly mean judgment basis as an innovative tool or the proposed capacity of the cooling densities for striped bass were 0.215/m3 as a tool to conserve fish or aquatic water intake structure) the potential for in the center channel, and 0.320/m3 organisms, compensate for the fish or impingement and entrainment is along the north shore.45 aquatic organisms killed, or enhance the relatively low. The optimal design • A study of densities in the aquatic habitat harmed or destroyed by Connecticut River in 1972 showed that the operation of cooling water intake 43 EPA acknowledge that there are a limited fish tended to be more abundant in the structures. Under Track II, this number of large facilities where alternative flexibility will be available to new technologies have been used. However, the use of more shallow areas near the east shore. fine mesh screens at Brunswick and big Bend have Distributions of fish also changed facilities to the extent that they can shown performance levels exceeding 70–80 percent. depending upon the time of day and the demonstrate performance comparable to Similarly, fine mesh wedgewire screens at Logan depth in the water column.46 that achieved in Track I. For example, have used to reduce entrainment by 90 percent. if a new facility that chooses Track II is While these sites draw water from tidally Biologically productive and/or influenced rivers, they should be equally sensitive areas that should be avoided on an impaired waterbody, that facility transferable to large, fresh water rivers in the during the intake siting process are may choose to demonstrate that velocity midwest. In fact, reliability and likely performance those that serve to promote: the controls in concert with measures to should be better than a site such as Big Bend where improve the productivity of the the bifouling would be a greats issue. The ‘‘actual’’ examples are supported by laboratory testing 44 King, R.G. 1977. Entrainment of Missouri River waterbody will result in performance showing the viability of fine mesh screens that was fish larvae Fort Calhoun Station. In: Jensen, L.D. comparable to that achieved in Track I. performed at Delmara Research, TVA, and the (Ed.), Fourth National Workshop on Entrainment The additional measures may include proposed Seminole Plant in Florida. These tests and Impringement EA Communications, Melville, such things as reclamation of found entrainment reductions using fine mesh NY, pp.45–56. screens of greater than 90 percent. the use of an 45 Stevens, D.E. and B.J. Finlayson. 1977. abandoned mine lands to eliminate or aquatic filter barrier system (i.e. gunderboom) at the Mortality of young striped bass entrained at two reduce acid mine drainage along a Lovett Station in New York is entirely transferable power plants in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, stretch of the waterbody, establishment to a large, Midwestern river system. This system is California, In: Jensen, L.D. (Ed.), Fourth National of riparian buffers or other barriers to now providing consistently greater than 80 percent Workshop on Entrainment and Impingement. EA reductions in entrainment and has the potential to Communications, Melville, NY, pp. 57–69. reduce runoff of solids and nutrients exceed 90 percent. The areas where aquatic filter 46 Marcy, B.C. 1974. Vulnerability and survival of from agricultural or silvicultural lands, barrier systems might not be effective/feasible young Connecticut River entrained at a nuclear removal of barriers to fish migration, or include ocean locations with high waves, limited power plant. In: Jensen, L.D. (Ed.), Entrainment and creation of new habitats to serve as access areas, and places where navigation could be Intake Screening: Proceedings of the Second effected. Note that feasibility should be similar to Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop. spawning or nursery areas. Another other barrier net systems, which have been installed Electric Power Research Institute Publication No. example might be a facility that chooses at a number of Great Lake sites, e.g., Ludington. 74–049–00–5, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 281–288. to demonstrate that flow reductions and
VerDate 11
less protective velocity controls, in rule. Under today’s final rule, new could potentially incur. Presumably, the concert with a fish hatchery to restock facilities needing additional cooling facilities will choose the most fish being impinged and entrained with water in other areas would need to economically favorable track, which fish that perform a similar function in supplement withdrawals from waters of would imply that the lowest cost is most the community structure, will result in the U.S. with other sources of cooling representative. For example, at Section performance comparable to that water or redesign their cooling systems VIII.B.3. below, EPA describes how a achieved in Track I. to use less water. permit applicant locating a facility with EPA recognizes that it may not always As another gauge of the siting impacts a once-through cooling system in certain be possible to establish quantitatively of the flow requirement for new waters such as large rivers and that the reduction in impact on fish and facilities, the Agency determined, from reservoirs may be able to demonstrate shellfish is comparable using the types a 1997 database of the Energy reduction of impingement mortality and of measures discussed above as would Information Agency and a 1994 Edison entrainment to a level of reduction be achieved in Track I, due to data and Electric Institute database, that 89 comparable to the level that would be modeling limitations. Despite such percent of existing non-nuclear utility achieved if they complied with the limitations, EPA believes that there are facilities could be sited at their current Track I requirements. However, the situations where a qualitative location under today’s final expediency of permitting through Track demonstration of comparable requirements if they also operated in I may result in reductions in financing performance can reasonably assure compliance with the capacity reduction costs and market advantages that may substantially similar performance. EPA requirements at § 125.84(b)(1). (Please outweigh the potential technology cost is thus providing, in § 125.86, that the note that the Agency does not intend to savings of Track II. The cost estimates Track II Comprehensive Demonstration prejudge or signal in any way whether above do not incorporate any savings Study should show that either: (1) The its final rule for existing facilities will occurring from the increased certainty Track II technologies would result in or will not include capacity limitations of Track I faster permitting and reduction in both impingement commensurate with a level that could be reduction in finance costs. As stated mortality and entrainment of all life attained by a recirculating cooling water above, for new in-scope power plants, stages of fish and shellfish of 90 percent system. EPA conducted this analysis to EPA’s record shows that 64 new or greater of the reduction that would be determine whether today’s proportional combined-cycle facilities and 10 new achieved through Track I (quantitative flow requirements would unreasonably coal-fired facilities would install a demonstration) or, (2) if consideration of limit siting alternatives for new facilities closed-cycle recirculating cooling water impacts other than impingement only.) system independently of the rule. As mortality and entrainment is included, Finally, to further examine the discussed in the Economic Analysis, for the Track II technologies will maintain potential siting implications of today’s those that would not otherwise install a rule for new facilities, the Agency fish and shellfish in the waterbody at a recirculating cooling system, EPA has reviewed data on water use by existing substantially similar level to that which determined that the capital costs of such facilities in arid regions of the country. would be achieved under Track I an installation would be economically The Agency found that 80 percent of the (quantitative or qualitative practicable and would not create a existing facilities in Arizona, California, demonstration). barrier to entry. By barrier to entry, EPA Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and means the requirements would not g. Track I and II: Proportional Flow Texas do not use waters of the U.S. in present costs that would prevent a new Finally, EPA examined the technical their operations, indicating that new facility from being built. For those feasibility of the proportional flow facilities in these areas would similarly facilities that would not otherwise reduction requirements at use waters other than waters of the U.S. §§ 125.84(b)(3), 125.84(c)(2), and in their operations. Therefore, today’s install a recirculating cooling system, 125.84(d)(2) of the rule. EPA based this final rule would not affect these EPA estimates that the annualized cost requirement, in addition to the closed- facilities if they were being constructed of such an installation is $19.1 million cycle recirculating cooling water as new facilities subject to the rule. for a large coal-fired plant (3,564 MW), technologies discussed above, on the $3.8 million for a medium coal-fired use of groundwater, municipal sources 3. Why Is the Two-Track Option plant (515 MW), and $0.7 million for a of water, treated wastewater (grey Economically Practicable? small coal-fired plant (63 MW). For a water), and on locating facilities on EPA has determined that the two- large combined-cycle facility (1,031 waterbodies that can meet the track option is economically practicable MW), installation of a recirculating proportional flow requirements. for the industries affected by the rule. cooling water system would cost EPA analyzed the potential siting For the two-track option that does not approximately $3.2 million annually. implications of the proportional flow distinguish between waterbody types, EPA finds that the final rule is requirements and determined that the cost of compliance to the industry economically practicable and achievable within the United States approximately is expected to be no more than $47.7 nationally for the industries affected 131,147 river miles have sufficient flow million annually. Because the Agency because a very small percentage of to support the water usage needs of cannot predict precisely which track the facilities within the industries are large manufacturing facilities projected facilities would choose and expected to be affected by the regulation withdrawing up to 18 MGD of water what the compliance response for Track and the impact on those that would be without exceeding the proportional flow II facilities would be, EPA estimated the affected would be small. For today’s limitations in this rule. Approximately costs based on the assumption that each final rule, EPA used the compliance 53,964 river miles could support a large new facility that does not plan to install cost/revenue test as a basis for non-utility power-producing facility a recirculating system in the baseline determining that the requirements on a withdrawing 85 MGD, and would choose to conduct the studies national level are economically approximately 14,542 river miles could required of Track II but then implement practicable. EPA used the compliance support a large utility plant requiring the requirements of Track I. This is the cost/revenue test to assess economic 700 MGD without exceeding of the most conservative cost estimate because achievability by comparing the proportional flow limitations in this it assumes the highest cost a facility magnitude of annualized compliance
VerDate 11
costs with the revenues the facility is more than two (2) MGD. Of these 406 has some detrimental effect on expected to generate. Under this test, facilities, only 296 facilities are electricity production by reducing EPA has determined that on average, the estimated to use more than 25 percent energy efficiency of steam turbines and rule will constitute 0.3, 1.2, and 0.14 of their total intake water for cooling is not technically feasible for all percent of projected annual revenue for water purposes. Thus, this finding of manufacturing applications. Finally, dry new combined-cycle power plants, coal- economic practicability is further cooling technology may pose unfair fired power plants, and manufacturing supported because only 15 percent of competitive disadvantages by region facilities, respectively. The cost to- the manufacturing industry sectors will and climate. Further, the two-track revenue ratio is estimated to range from incur costs under this rule. According to option selected is extremely effective at 0.7 percent to 5.2 percent of revenues EPA’s analysis, economic impacts on reducing impingement and entrainment, for steam electric generating facilities the manufacturing facilities from this and while the dry cooling option is and less than 0.1 percent to 0.5 percent final rule would be economically slightly more effective at reducing of annual revenues for manufacturing practicable because the facilities impingement and entrainment, it does facilities. None of the 38 projected new projected to be in scope of this rule so at a cost that is more than three times manufacturing facilities was estimated would be able to afford the technologies the cost of wet cooling. Therefore, EPA to incur annualized compliance costs necessary to meet the regulations. does not find it to represent the ‘‘best greater than 1 percent of annual technology available’’ for minimizing C. Why EPA Is Not Adopting Dry revenues. Based on EPA’s analysis, the adverse environmental impact. EPA Cooling as the Best Technology steam electric generating facilities recognizes that dry cooling technology Available for Minimizing Adverse projected to be in scope of this rule are uses extremely low-level or no cooling Environmental Impact? able to afford these economic impacts. water intake, thereby reducing In general, the Agency concludes that In establishing best technology impingement and entrainment of economic impacts on the electric available for minimizing adverse organisms to dramatically low levels. generating industry from this final rule environmental impact the final rule, However, EPA interprets the use of the would be economically practicable, EPA considered an alternative based on word ‘‘minimize’’ in CWA section because the facilities required to comply a zero-intake flow (or nearly zero, 316(b) to give EPA discretion to with the requirements would be able to extremely low flow) requirement consider technologies that very afford the technologies necessary to commensurate with levels achievable effectively reduce, but do not meet the regulations. through the use of dry cooling systems. completely eliminate, impingement and Finally, since the analysis for new Dry cooling systems (towers) use either entrainment as meeting the facilities entails some uncertainty a natural or a mechanical air draft to requirements of section 316(b) the CWA. because it reflects a projection into the transfer heat from condenser tubes to Although EPA has rejected dry future, EPA is maintaining in the final air. In conventional closed-cycle cooling technology as a national rule a provision in the regulation recirculating wet cooling towers, minimum requirement, EPA does not authorizing alternative requirements cooling water that has been used to cool intend to restrict the use of dry cooling where data specific to the facility the condensers is pumped to the top of or to dispute that dry cooling may be the indicate that compliance with the a recirculating cooling tower; as the appropriate cooling technology for some requirement at issue would result in heated water falls, it cools through an facilities. This could be the case in areas costs wholly out of proportion to the evaporative process and warm, moist air with limited water available for cooling costs EPA considered in this analysis. rises out of the tower, often creating a or waterbodies with extremely sensitive See § 125.85 of this rule. vapor plume. Hybrid wet-dry cooling biological resources (e.g., endangered Considering the economic impacts on towers employ both a wet section and species, specially protected areas). An the electric generating industry as a dry section and reduce or eliminate the application of dry cooling will virtually whole, today’s final rule only applies to visible plumes associated with wet eliminate use of cooling water and those electric generating facilities that cooling towers. impingement and entrainment, in generate electricity with a steam prime In evaluating dry cooling-based almost all foreseeable circumstances, mover and that meet certain regulatory alternatives, EPA analyzed a would reduce a facility’s use of cooling requirements (e.g., have or need to have zero or nearly zero intake flow water below the levels that make a an NPDES permit, withdraw equal to or requirement based on the use of dry facility subject to these national greater than 2 MGD from waters of the cooling systems as the primary minimum requirements. U.S.). As summarized in Exhibit 1 and regulatory requirement in either (1) all Exhibit 2 above, an analysis of the waters of the U.S. or (2) tidal rivers, 1. Barrier to Entry NEWGen database shows that only 69 estuaries, the Great Lakes, and oceans. EPA has determined that higher out of the 241 new combined-cycle The Agency also considered capital and operating costs associated facilities (28.6 percent) would be subject subcategorization strategies for the new with dry cooling may pose barrier to to this rule, and only 14 out of 35 new facility regulation based on size and entry for some new sources in certain coal-fired facilities (40.5 percent). types of new facilities and location circumstances. (In general, barrier to For the manufacturer industry sectors within regions of the country, since entry means that it is too costly for a with at least one new facility that is these factors may affect the viability of new facility to enter into the subject to this final rule, an analysis of dry cooling technologies. marketplace). A minimum national the data collected using the Agency’s EPA rejects dry cooling as best requirement based on dry cooling section 316(b) Industry Detailed technology available for a national systems would result in annualized Questionnaire for existing facilities requirement and under the compliance cost of greater than 4 indicates that only 472 of the 1,976 subcategorization strategies described percent of revenues for all of 83 nationally estimated existing facilities above, because the technology of dry projected electric generators within the have an NPDES permit and directly cooling carries costs that are sufficient scope of the rule. For 12 generators, withdraw cooling water from waters of to pose a barrier to entry to the costs would exceed 10% of revenues. the U.S. Of these 472 facilities, only 406 marketplace for some projected new EPA’s economic analysis demonstrates facilities are estimated to withdraw facilities. Dry cooling technology also that a regulatory alternative based on a
VerDate 11
national minimum dry cooling-based system.47 The State of New York penalties could have significant requirement would result in annualized estimates that use of a dry cooling technical feasibility implications. For compliance costs to facilities of over system at the 1,080-MW Athens example, dry cooling facilities have as a $490 million, exceeding the annual Generating Company facility would cost design feature turbine back pressure costs of a regulation based on approximately $1.9 million more per limits that often trigger a plant shut recirculating wet cooling towers by year, over 20 years, than a hybrid wet- down if the back pressure reaches a more than 900 percent ($443 million dry cooling system. The total dry cooled certain level. Peak summer effects of annually). projected cost would be approximately inefficiency of dry cooling can and do Because the technology can cause $500 million. Because dry cooling cause turbine back pressure limits to be inefficiencies in operation under certain systems are so much larger than wet exceeded at some demonstrated plants high ambient temperature conditions cooling systems, these systems’ which in turn experience shutdown and because of the greater capital and operation and maintenance require conditions when the back pressure operating costs of the dry cooling more parts, labor, etc. Costs of this limits are reached. In addition, these system compared with the industry magnitude, when imposed upon one performance penalties could pose standard of using recirculating closed- subcategory of facilities but not another, potential power supply and reliability cycle wet cooling systems, requiring dry provide a disparate competitive issues if dry cooling were required on a cooling as a minimum national environment, especially for deregulated nationwide or regional basis. For requirement could, in some cases, also energy markets. New facilities are example, EPA estimates that in hot result in unfair competitive advantages competing against the many combined- climates dry cooling equipped power for some facilities. Thus, while at least cycle and coal-fired facilities already in plants experience peak summer energy one state has required dry cooling, EPA the marketplace or slated for substantial penalties of 3.4 to 4.3 percent for does not believe it is appropriate to expansion that use wet, closed-cycle combined cycle plants and 14.8 to 19.4 mandate this requirement on a national cooling systems or even once-through percent for coal fired plants, as basis. In EPA’s view the disparity in cooling systems. The potential compared to once-through cooling costs and operating efficiency of the dry economic impact should EPA not systems. These peak summer penalties cooling systems compared with wet similarly require dry cooling for some or represent significant reductions in cooling systems is considerable when all existing facilities might cause some production at power plants in periods viewed on a nationwide or regional firms to, at the least, delay their entry when demand is greatest. Compared to basis. For example, under a uniform into the marketplace until they better the selected option which a large national requirement based on dry understand the regulatory majority of new facilities were planning cooling, facilities in the southern environmental costs faced by their to install independent of this rule, all 83 regions of the U.S. would be at an unfair competitors. electric generators would be required to competitive disadvantage to those in 2. Energy Penalty and Other Non- install dry cooling technology. The cooler northern climates, far more than Aquatic Impacts energy impacts (power losses) if the rule were not based on such a associated with these 83 facilities is Given the performance penalty of dry requirement. Even under the regional estimated to comprise 0.51 percent of cooling versus wet cooling, the subcategorization strategy for facilities total new electric generating capacity incremental air emissions of dry cooling in cool climatic regions of the U.S., (i.e., a reduction in new design as compared with wet cooling, provide adoption of a minimum requirement generating capacity of 1,904 MW). These additional support for why EPA is based on dry cooling could impose energy impacts raise the concern that on rejecting dry cooling. Dry cooling unfair competitive restrictions for new a large scale, dry cooling technology technology results in a performance facilities. This relates primarily to the may affect electricity supply reliability. penalty for electricity generation that is elevated capital and operating costs This significant reduction in electricity likely to be significant under certain associated with dry cooling. Adoption production is another reason EPA has climatic conditions. By ‘‘performance of requirements based on dry cooling for not selected dry cooling as the best penalty’’ EPA means that dry cooling a subcategory of facilities under a technology available for minimizing technology requires the power producer particular capacity would pose similar adverse environmental impacts on a to utilize more energy than would be competitive disadvantages for those nationwide or regional basis. required with recirculating wet cooling facilities. Furthermore, EPA is to produce the same amount of power. Because of the performance penalty, concerned that requiring dry cooling for EPA concludes that performance power producers using dry cooling a subcategory of new facilities would penalties associated with dry cooling produce more air emissions per create a disincentive to building a new tower systems pose a significant kilowatt-hour of energy produced. combined-cycle facility (with associated feasibility problem in some climates. As Nationally, EPA estimates that a lower flows) in lieu of modifying discussed in Chapter 3 of the Technical minimum requirement based on dry existing facilities, which may have Development Document, EPA estimates cooling would cause significant air greater environmental impacts. Dry the mean annual performance penalty of emissions increases over wet cooling cooling systems can cost as much as a dry cooling system relative to systems. EPA projects for the dry three times more to install than a recirculating wet cooling towers at 1.7 cooling alternative that CO2, NOX, SO2, comparable wet cooling system. For and 6.9 percent for combined-cycle and and Hg emissions would increase by 8.9 example, the Astoria Energy LLC coal-fired facilities, respectively. Peak- million, 22,300, 47,000, and 300 pounds Queens application filed with the State summer energy shortfalls for dry cooling per year, respectively. See Chapter 3 of of New York indicated that a dry towers as compared to wet towers can the Technical Development Document cooling system would cost $32 million exceed 2.7 and 9.3 percent for combined for more information on EPA’s air more to install than a hybrid wet-dry cycle and coal-fired facilities, emissions analysis, including a cooling system for a proposed 1,000- respectively. These performance discussion of the coincidence between MW plant. Operating costs would be maximum air emissions and the periods $30 million more for the dry cooling 47 Astoria Energy LLC Queens Facility of the most severe air pollution system than the hybrid wet-dry Application. problems. These additional non-aquatic
VerDate 11
environmental impacts (in the form of an available temperature that is not range’’ and thus should be determined air emissions) further support EPA’s reliably met by utilizing dry cooling. to ‘‘in almost every case avoid adverse determination that dry cooling does not However, in some specific environmental impact, thereby represent best technology available for circumstances, EPA is aware of several exceeding the requirements of section minimizing adverse environmental demonstrated cases of dry cooling for 316(b).’’ While EPA’s approach does not impact on a national or region-specific cogeneration plants that are associated preclude the use of these alternative basis. with manufacturers. technologies if they demonstrate 3. Cost-Effectiveness D. Why EPA Is Not Accepting the impingement and entrainment Industry Two-Track Approach in Full reductions equivalent to those of the EPA also considered the incremental suite of technologies it has described as costs and impingement and entrainment While EPA is adopting the general ‘‘best technology available for reduction between the selected option two-track framework suggested by a minimizing adverse environmental and dry cooling. Dry cooling, while very trade association representing the impact,’’ in EPA’s view the record does effective in reducing impingement and electric generating industry, EPA is not not show that using just one of the entrainment, is very expensive to accepting all aspects of this approach. technologies listed above in order to implement. EPA understands that dry The primary differences between the qualify for expedited fast-track cooling can virtually eliminate the need approach that EPA is promulgating and permitting is equivalent in reducing for cooling water and therefore the approach industry suggested are: (1) impingement and entrainment in a dramatically reduces impingement and The final two-track approach defines a manner that reflects best technology entrainment. However, EPA has different level of environmental available for minimizing adverse determined that the costs associated performance as ‘‘best available environmental impact. While barrier with implementing dry cooling are ten technology for minimizing adverse methods are effective at reducing times as expensive as wet cooling. EPA environmental impact’’ for the ‘‘fast impingement, EPA’s record shows that has shown that the selected option, track’’ and (2) the final two-track they are currently not as effective at requiring facilities to reduce their intake approach contains a different way of reducing entrainment as EPA’s preferred flows to a level commensurate with that measuring equivalence with the option. This is because larvae and very which can be attained by a closed-cycle, environmental performance of the ‘‘fast small organisms can still pass through recirculating cooling water system, track’’ in the second track. In short, EPA the barrier and may be entrained. While would reduce the amount of water prefers a more concrete and objective industry asserts that entrainment does withdrawn for cooling purposes by 70 to measure of best technology available for not lead to mortality, there is conflicting 98 percent. In addition, EPA has shown minimizing adverse environmental evidence in the record on this topic, that this would result in corresponding impact for the new facility rule than some of which indicates that in fact a reductions in impingement and does the measure suggested by the large percentage of organisms can perish entrainment. Further, the record shows industry proposal. or be severely harmed when entrained. that other requirements in the rule, such Under EPA’s approach, best For these reasons, EPA does not find as velocity and proportional flow limits technology available for minimizing that the record supports the notion that and the requirement to implement adverse environmental impact for new the technologies listed by industry in its design and construction technologies, facilities would be the level of two-track proposal as ‘‘exceeding the would result in additional reductions in impingement and entrainment impingement and entrainment. Based reduction achievable by (1) technology requirements of section 316(b)’’ are as on the information available in the that reduces intake capacity in a manner effective at reducing impingement and record, EPA estimates that the selected comparable to that of a recirculating wet entrainment as the suite of technologies option may result in reduction of cooling tower; (2) technologies that EPA has found to be technically impingement to levels that could reduce design through-screen velocity to available and economically practicable possibly exceed 99 percent. Estimated reduce impingement, as explained in to the industries affected as a whole. For reductions in entrainment could also be Section V.B.1.c of this preamble; (3) the further discussion of entrainment and substantial on a case-by-case basis (70 to applicant’s selected design and the performance of a variety of cooling 95 percent). Because EPA’s selected construction technologies for water intake structure technologies, see option is very effective in reducing minimizing impingement and Section III of this preamble and Chapter impingement and entrainment and is entrainment and maximizing 5 of the Technical Development one-tenth the cost, EPA believes that it impingement survival; and (4) capacity Document. is reasonable to reject dry cooling as a and location-based technology The industry two-track approach is nationally applicable minimum in all requirements for limiting flow based on industry’s argument that the cases. withdrawal to a certain proportion of a CWA compels EPA to determine section waterbody. By contrast, the industry 316(b) limits on a case-by-case basis 4. Technical Feasibility of Dry Cooling proposal asserts that ‘‘closed cycle examining first whether the cooling for Manufacturers cooling and low intake velocity reduces water intake structure causes population EPA considers that dry cooling entrainment and impingement to such or ecosystem effects before requiring technologies for manufacturing cooling low levels that adverse environmental any technology, because, industry water intake structures, as a whole, pose impact is avoided, thereby not just asserts, this is the only plausible significant engineering feasibility meeting, but exceeding, the section interpretation of the phrase ‘‘adverse problems. The primary feasibility issue 316(b) standard of protection.’’ environmental impact.’’ EPA does not is that dry cooling requires nearly zero Further, the industry proposal states believe that the language of the statute water intake and many manufacturers that wedgewire screens, traveling fine compels this interpretation. Instead, reuse cooling water in their process. mesh screens, and aquatic filter barrier EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret This dual use for process and cooling systems, either alone or in combination, section 316(b)’s requirement to establish water prevents the application of dry are sufficient, at least in certain types of ‘‘best technology available for cooling. In addition, many waterbodies, in that they ‘‘may provide minimizing adverse environmental manufacturers require cooling water at a level of protection within the same impact’’ to authorize EPA to promulgate
VerDate 11
technology-based performance inconsistent with making fast and Some commenters indicated that the requirements analogous to those derived reliable permitting decisions, an issue of proposed regulatory definition of new for point sources under sections 301 particular importance for permitting facility, which references the existing (existing sources) and 306 (new sources) new facilities. EPA’s record shows that NPDES new source and new discharger for minimizing a suite of adverse in order to study and demonstrate definitions, is confusing. For example, environmental impacts, including proper population studies, the some commenters asserted that defining impingement and entrainment, permitting approval process would be the total replacement of an existing diminishment of compensatory reserve, adversely delayed for some new process as a new facility is not and stresses to populations, facilities. Specifically, because of the consistent with application of the rule communities of organisms, and complexity of biological studies, it is only to greenfield or stand-alone ecosystems. The controls required today very difficult to assess the cause and facilities. Commenters indicated that the appropriately reflect technologies that effect of cooling water intake structures regulation should make it very clear that for new facilities are available and on ecosystems or on important species the new facility rule applies only to economically practicable, that do not within an ecosystem. An overwhelming greenfield and stand-alone facilities. To have unacceptable non-aquatic majority of scientists have stated that clarify the definition of new facility, environmental impacts (including biological studies can take multiple some commenters encouraged EPA to impacts on the energy supply across the years because of the complex nature of include language or examples from the United States), and that reduce biological systems. Moreover, unlike in proposed preamble in the final impingement and entrainment of the laboratory, where conditions are regulatory language. Several aquatic organisms in a manner that will controlled, a multitude of confounding commenters requested that EPA more help support, maintain, and protect factors make biological studies very explicitly clarify that a new aquatic ecosystems. EPA wants to be difficult to perform and make causation, cogeneration plant installed to serve an very clear that this decision relates only in particular, difficult to determine. All existing facility would not be to new facilities. In making the of these issues take time to assess. EPA considered a new facility under this upcoming decisions regarding existing estimates that a credible job of studying rule. facilities in Phases II and III, EPA will these issues could take up to 3 years to The Agency believes that most new carefully weigh all of the relevant complete. While some of this study can facilities subject to this rule will be factors, many of which are different for be conducted prior to start-up of the considered new sources as defined in 40 existing facilities than for new facilities. plant, this could cause delays in many CFR 122.2 and 122.29(b)(1), (2), and (4) In addition, while EPA agrees that a situations. For these reasons, EPA does and subject to new source performance two-track approach is an effective way not believe that a population approach standards for effluent discharges. 48 to implement CWA section 316(b) for makes sense for new facilities. Under 122.29(b), a source is a new new facilities, EPA does not believe that source if it meets the definition of new a population-based approach for VI. Summary of Major Comments on source in 122.2 (effectively, it defining both the fast track and the Proposed Rule and Notice of Data discharges or may discharge pollutants, equivalent performance in the second Availability (NODA) and its construction commenced after track is a workable solution for new A. Scope/Applicability promulgation—or proposal in specified facilities. circumstances—of a new source Comments on the scope and With respect to the ‘‘fast track’’ performance standard) and it meets any applicability of the new facility rule suggested by industry, EPA does not of three conditions. The first is that the address several issues, including the have a record indicating that the source is constructed at a site at which definition of a new facility, the technologies cited by industry (such as no other source is located (40 CFR definition of a cooling water intake a fish return system alone) are the best 122.29(b)(1)(i)). The second is that the structure (including the twenty-five (25) technologies available for reducing source totally replaces the process or percent cooling water use threshold), impingement and entrainment. production equipment that causes a the proposed threshold for cooling Moreover, even if population were the discharge at an existing facility (40 CFR water withdrawals (i.e., 2 MGD), and the only endpoint, the record does not 122.29(b)(1)(ii)). The third is that the support the assertion that the requirement for a facility to hold a new source’s processes are substantially technology cited by industry would NPDES permit. independent of any existing source at qualify for the fast track because it can 1. New Facility Definition the same site (40 CFR 122.29(b)(1)(iii)). be uniformly predicted across the nation EPA stated in the proposed rule that the not to have population impacts EPA proposed to define a ‘‘new new facility rule applies to greenfield (assuming one can agree upon what are facility’’ as any building, structure, facilities, described as facilities that the relevant species of concern) for all facility, or installation that meets the meet the first and second conditions new facilities nationally in any location. definition of a ‘‘new source’’ or ‘‘new above, and stand-alone facilities, which At the same time, EPA has identified discharger’’ in 40 CFR 122.2 and are those that meet the third condition, technologies that for new facilities 122.29(b)(1), (2), and (4); commences (which, unlike existing facilities, do not construction after the effective date of provided these facilities meet other have retrofitting costs) that are the final rule; and has a new or applicable conditions (i.e., technically available and economically modified cooling water intake structure. commencement of construction after the practicable. Therefore for new facilities, See proposed 40 CFR 125.83; 65 FR effective date of the final rule, new or EPA believes it is reasonable to require 49116. 48 Although the Agency believes that most new such technologies on a national basis to Numerous commenters supported facilities subject to this rule will be considered new reduce impingement and entrainment. EPA’s determination that the new sources, EPA has included the reference to the With respect to the second track, EPA facility rule should apply only to definition of new discharger at 122.2 to address any does not prefer the population approach greenfield and stand-alone facilities but new facility that may commence construction prior to the promulgation of a new source performance for new facilities, because the time and questioned whether EPA had clearly standard. The Agency notes that the definition of complexity of conducting population and effectively limited applicability of new discharger in 122.2 only applies to facilities studies properly is generally the proposed rule to such facilities. not defined as a new source.
VerDate 11
modified CWIS). Thus, the Agency do not result in the facility being approach is justified because EPA has believes the language of the regulation defined as a new facility, regardless of based the proposed new facility does make it clear that the rule applies whether these changes result in the use requirements on the assumption that to greenfield and stand-alone facilities of a new or modified cooling water each owner or operator has the option or those whose processes are intake structure that increases existing to choose the location of his or her new substantially independent of an existing design capacity. EPA does not agree that facility and that such location would be facility at the same site. As commenters by not addressing most repowering selected to allow the owner or operator requested, EPA has added some under this rule the Agency is creating an to best comply with the intake structure examples to the regulatory section of the incentive to use less efficient location and operation requirements. rule to serve as guidance regarding the technology. Both the power-generating With regard to defining when a definition of new facility under this and manufacturing industries routinely facility is substantially independent final rule. seek greater efficiency when under 40 CFR 122.29, EPA does not Several commenters also questioned repowering. This is illustrated by the believe it is feasible to project under whether repowering an existing facility increased use over the past 10 years of what circumstances owners and would trigger applicability of the new combined-cycle technology, which operators are free to select any location facility requirements. These requires significantly less cooling water they desire for a new facility. For this commenters pointed out that for a given level of power generation reason, EPA takes the facility as it is repowering is a common practice that and is a more efficient process than planned for purposes of determining often results in a gain in efficiency (i.e., older technologies. whether it is a new facility. In today’s both increased power output and a Several commenters supported EPA’s rule EPA does not believe it is reduced need for cooling water definition of new facility as proposed. appropriate to define the phrase withdrawals). Commenters expressed In contrast to concerns discussed above, ‘‘substantially independent’’ as used in concern that, although repowering an some commenters expressed 122.29(b)(1)(iii) as facilities that could existing facility is distinct from building apprehension that the new facility be practicably located at a separate site. a greenfield or stand-alone facility, definition would not capture all Section 122.29(b)(1)(iii) in the existing repowering could be interpreted as appropriate facilities. These NPDES regulations already provides subject to the new source definition and commenters observed that an existing that ‘‘[i]n determining whether . . . thereby subject to the new facility rule. facility could rebuild its whole facility processes are substantially independent, Some also asserted that the proposed behind the cooling water intake the Director shall consider such factors rule included an arbitrary distinction structure and not be subject to the as the extent to which the new facility between completely replacing an requirements applicable to a new is integrated with the existing plant; and existing facility and repowering that facility. These commenters asserted that the extent to which the new facility is facility. By defining the complete if an operator completely rebuilds an engaged in the same general type of replacement of a facility as a new existing facility that facility should be activity as the existing source.’’ EPA facility but allowing repowering to be subject to the new facility requirements. does not think it is feasible for the defined as an existing facility, these EPA can foresee one instance in permit authority to judge whether the commenters argued, the proposed rule which the concern raised by this facility could have been elsewhere for creates an incentive to use less efficient commenter may be well founded. In this the purpose of determining whether the technology for the redevelopment of rule EPA has defined a new facility in facility is subject to the new facility older sites. Commenters also noted that a manner consistent with existing rules. Commenters also requested that the proposed rule would regulate a new, NPDES regulations, with a limited EPA define what actions constitute greenfield facility and the complete exception. EPA generally deferred routine maintenance to an existing replacement of an existing facility (i.e., regulation of new sources constructed cooling water intake, so that the a brownfield site) in a similar manner, on a site at which an existing source is distinction between changes that which creates a disincentive to located (see 40 CFR 122.29(b)(3)) until constitute maintenance and those that redevelop or modernize brownfield the Agency completes analysis of its constitute a modification to an existing sites. survey data on existing facilities. intake is made clearer. The definition of a new facility in the However, in addition to meeting the EPA has not defined ‘‘routine final rule applies to a facility that is definition of a new source, today’s rule maintenance’’ in the final rule because repowered only if the existing facility requires that a new facility have a new clarifying what constitutes routine has been demolished and another cooling water intake structure or use an maintenance is not vital to the facility is constructed in its place, and existing intake structure that has been definition of new facility. Under the modifies the existing cooling water modified to increase the design new facility rule, to be considered a new intake structure to increase the design capacity. Thus, it might be possible to facility a facility must be a new source intake capacity. To the extent completely demolish an existing source, or new discharger and use a newly commenters assert some inequity of replace it with a smaller-capacity new constructed cooling water intake treatment between new facilities and source, and not be regulated under structure or a modified existing cooling certain existing facilities, EPA will today’s rule as a new facility. This water intake structure whose design address this comment when it addresses facility would then be an existing intake has been increased. Thus, what substantive requirements apply to facility an as such the requirements changes to a cooling water intake existing facilities. Further, changes to an applicable to such a facility will be structure at an existing facility that is existing facility that do not totally addressed in Phase II and III. not a new source or new discharger are replace the process or production Several commenters requested that not subject to this rule. In addition, at equipment that causes a discharge at an EPA define facilities deemed to be facilities that are new sources or new existing facility (e.g., partial substantially independent for purposes dischargers but may use an existing repowering), and those that do not of applying the new source criteria cooling water intake structure, EPA has result in a new separate facility whose under 40 CFR 122.29 as those that could clarified in the final rule that the facility processes are substantially independent be practicably located at a separate site. is subject to this rule only where of any existing source at the same site, Commenters maintained that such an changes to the intake result in an
VerDate 11
increase in design capacity. At facilities writers should determine any the flow of water withdrawn also that are new sources or new dischargers, appropriate section 316(b) requirements advances the objectives of section changes to an intake structure that do for structures withdrawing less than 316(b). not result in an increase in design 25% of intake flow for cooling purposes 3. Applicability Criteria: Requirement to capacity do not result in that facility on a case-by-case basis. Withdraw Water From a Water of the being subject to this rule. Some commenters suggested that Finally, some commenters expressed cooling water intake structures should U.S., the Twenty-Five (25) Percent concern about the status of facilities that not be defined in a way that would Cooling Water Use Threshold, and the are under construction or have recently include the pumps in the cooling water Two (2) MGD Intake Flow Threshold been constructed. These commenters system. Commenters maintained that As was proposed, the final new suggested that such facilities should not pumps are part of the cooling water facility rule applies to any new facility be defined as new facilities. Others system, not part of the intake, and they that (1) has or is required to have an asserted that it is unfair to define a assert that the Agency has authority NPDES permit; (2) proposes to use a facility that has submitted a permit under section 316(b) only over cooling cooling water intake structure to application but has not started water intake structures. Commenters withdraw water from waters of the U.S.; construction as a new facility. noted that changing pumps is part of the (3) uses at least twenty-five (25) percent The Agency chose the commencement normal routine of maintenance and of the water withdrawn for cooling of construction date because it was repair performed at facilities that use purposes; and (4) has a design intake generally consistent with the term ‘‘new water for cooling and that such activity flow of greater than two (2) million source’’ in the existing NPDES should not trigger applicability of the gallons per day (MGD). See proposed 40 permitting regulations and it should new facility rule. CFR 125.81 and 125.83; 65 FR 49116. provide adequate notice and time for In the final rule EPA has clarified the Commenters raised several concerns facilities to implement the technological definition of cooling water intake regarding the proposed 25 percent changes required under the rule. The structure to explicitly include the first threshold. A number of commenters date a facility commences construction intake pump or series of pumps. The asserted that EPA did not provide a is clarified at 40 CFR 122.29(b)(4). This explicit inclusion of the intake pumps rational basis in its record for proposing provision describes certain installation in the cooling water intake structure that use of 25 percent of intake flow for and site preparation activities that are definition reflects the key role pumps cooling purposes should determine part of a continuous onsite construction play in determining the capacity (i.e., whether an intake structure is a cooling program; it includes entering into dynamic capacity) of the intake. These water intake structure. Commenters specified binding contractual pumps, which bring in water, are an asserted that it is inappropriate to base obligations. Thus, under today’s rule essential component of the cooling the 25 percent cooling water use facilities that are constructed or water intake structure since without threshold on the number of cooling commence construction within the them the intake could not work as water intake structures or amount of meaning of 40 CFR 122.29(b)(4) prior to designed. Section 316(b) authorizes EPA cooling water flow this threshold would or on the effective date of the final rule to impose limitations on the volume of make subject to this rule. Several are not new facilities. Those that the flow of water withdrawn through a commenters observed that no single commence construction after the cooling water intake structure as a threshold can be applied to all intakes effective date of this rule and meet the means of addressing ‘‘capacity.’’ In re to accurately distinguish cooling water other regulatory thresholds defined in Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, intakes from other intakes. If EPA is § 125.81 are subject to the requirements Decision of the General Counsel No. 41 determined to use a single threshold in of this rule. (June 1, 1976). Such limitations on the this definition, numerous commenters favored a threshold of 50 percent 2. Definition of Cooling Water Intake volume of flow are consistent with the 49 cooling water use, which commenters Structure dictionary definition of ‘‘capacity,’’ the legislative history of the Clean Water stated is the de facto threshold used EPA proposed that the term ‘‘cooling Act,50 and the 1976 regulations.51 Id. under the existing definition of a water intake structure’’ means the total Indeed, as Decision of the General cooling water intake structure found in physical structure and any associated Counsel No. 41 points out, the major 1977 draft guidance. However, some constructed waterways used to environmental impacts of cooling water commenters maintained that for an withdraw cooling water from waters of intake structures are those affecting intake to be defined as a cooling water the U.S., provided that at least twenty- aquatic organisms living in the volumes intake structure the vast majority (i.e., five (25) percent of the water withdrawn of water withdrawn through the intake 75–100 percent) of water withdrawn is used for cooling purposes. See, structure. (Statement of Mr. Buckley, must be used for cooling. As discussed above, in the final rule proposed 40 CFR 125.83; 65 FR 49116. Senate consideration of the Report of EPA has placed the 25 percent threshold In the NODA the Agency requested the Conference Committee [discusses in the applicability section to clarify the comments on two additional intake from once-through systems]. A applicability of the rule. Permit writers alternatives. See, 66 FR 28854. Legislative History of the WPCA Most of the comments addressing the may determine that an intake structure Amendments of 1972, 93rd Cong., 1st definition of cooling water intake that withdraws less than 25% of the Sess., Committee Print at 196, 197). structure focused on the 25 percent intake flow for cooling purposes should Therefore, regulation of the volume of threshold for cooling water use. These be subject to section 316(b) comments are summarized and 49 ‘‘Cubic contents; volume; that which can be requirements, and set appropriate addressed under Section VI.A.3, below. contained.’’ Random House Dictionary of the requirements on a case-by-case basis, EPA has placed the 25 percent threshold English Language, cited in Decision of the General using Best Professional Judgment. in the applicability requirements of the Counsel No. 41. Although cooling water intake final rule to clarify the definition of 50 Legislative History of the Water Pollution structures that fall below the 25% Control Act Amendments of 1972, 93d Cong., 1st cooling water intake structure. Intakes Sess., at 196–7 (1973). threshold are not subject to today’s below this threshold are not subject to 51 40 CFR 402.11(c)(definition of ‘‘capacity’’), 41 national rule, today’s rule does not today’s national rule; however, permit FR 17390 (April 26, 1976). inhibit permit writers, including those
VerDate 11
at the Federal, State, or Tribal level, constant, or where the withdrawal of intake structure impact data support from addressing such cooling water cooling water is intermittent. thresholds exceeding 500 MGD. A few intake structures as deemed necessary. In the final rule EPA has amended the commenters maintained that it is not EPA chose 25 percent as a reasonable definition of cooling water intake appropriate to apply a single threshold threshold for the percent of flow used structure to ensure that the rule does not to all waterbody sizes. Several for cooling purposes in conjunction discourage the reuse of cooling water as supported the two MGD threshold. with the two MGD total flow threshold process water. EPA has amended the Several commenters also supported discussed below to ensure that almost proposed definition of cooling water higher thresholds, including 5, 10, 25, all cooling water withdrawn from intake structure to specify that cooling and 100 MGD. Some commenters waters of the U.S. is addressed by the water that is used in a manufacturing maintained that section 316(b) requirements in this rule for minimizing process, either before or after it is used requirements should apply to all cooling adverse environmental impact. EPA for cooling, is considered process water water intake structures and that estimates that approximately 68 percent for purposes of calculating the therefore no flow threshold is necessary. of manufacturing facilities that meet percentage of a new facility’s intake EPA chose the two MGD threshold other thresholds for the rule and 93 flow that is used for cooling and because this threshold addresses the percent of power-generating facilities whether that percentage exceeds 25 majority of new facilities and therefore that meet other thresholds for the rule percent. In addition, EPA also has provides the States and Tribes with a use more than 25 percent of intake added guidance to the regulation that national rule that can be easily applied water for cooling. In contrast, clarifies how the 25 percent threshold to a majority of permitting decisions approximately 49 percent of new should be applied to new facilities that they face in order to implement the legal manufacturing facilities use more than do not maintain a constant ratio of requirements of CWA section 316(b). All 50 percent of intake water for cooling. cooling water to process water. See cooling water intake flow results in the EPA does not believe it is reasonable to § 125.81(c) of this rule. This guidance potential for impingement and exclude from regulation nearly half of provides that the threshold requirement entrainment. Thus, all facilities must those manufacturing facilities that use that at least 25 percent of water address section 316(b) requirements in large volumes of cooling water and, as withdrawn be used for cooling purposes the same fashion. Therefore, where a result, impinge and entrain aquatic is to be measured, on the basis of facility EPA’s record demonstrates that the organisms. EPA also considered it design, on an average monthly basis requirements are technically available, over a period of 1 year (any 12-month economically practicable, and not have important to cover as many of the period). It further clarifies that a new unacceptable non-water quality facilities as possible in order to create facility meets the 25 percent cooling environmental impacts, including regulatory certainty for new facilities water threshold if any monthly average, energy impacts, the Agency believes and for States and Tribes that must over a year, for the percentage of cooling that it is appropriate for the new facility permit these new facilities. EPA water withdrawn equals or exceeds 25 rule to address the majority of cooling predicts this will leave four (4) percent percent of the total water withdrawn. water intake structure facilities. In doing of the electric power generating Numerous commenters asserted that so, EPA resolves for permit writers what facilities and thirty-two (32) percent of the two MGD threshold is too low and the requirements are for new facilities. manufacturing facilities to the is not supported by a credible On the basis of data for facilities with discretion of the permit writer. EPA justification. Some commenters stated cooling water intake structures built in believes that new facilities that use less that the two MGD cutoff is overly the past 10 years, EPA estimates that 58 than 25 percent of water withdrawn for conservative given that many facilities percent of the manufacturers, 70 percent cooling are most effectively addressed determined to be causing no adverse of the nonutilities, and 100 percent of by States and Tribes on a best impact have considerably greater flows. the utilities will be regulated under the professional judgement (BPJ) basis, For example, these commenters note two MGD threshold. At the two MGD rather than under a national rule, since that the State of Maryland uses a 10 threshold, 62 percent of all in-scope BPJ provides a certain degree of MGD threshold, which commenters facilities using surface water and 99.7 flexibility for a permit writer to consider state would capture 99.67 percent of all percent of the total flow will be covered. available technologies and unique existing cooling water flows if applied Estimated total flow is approximately 9 factors posed by new facilities that are on a national basis. Several commenters billion gallons per day. EPA did not below the threshold. supported the use of Maryland’s select a significantly higher threshold, Several manufacturers commented approach. Others stated that the such as 15 or 25 MGD, because these that the rule as proposed may create a proposed rule contained insufficient thresholds would exclude most utility, disincentive to manufacturing data to be science-based (i.e., based on nonutility and manufacturing facilities operations increasing efficiency through the level of withdrawal above which from regulation. At a threshold of 15 reducing process water use, since such adverse environmental impact occurs). MGD, 32 percent of the manufacturers, reductions increase the percentage of Commenters also observed that many of 29 percent of the nonutilities, and 50 cooling water used. These commenters the environmental impact data EPA percent of the utilities would be observed that since process water is presented in the proposed rule focused covered, as would 97.3 percent of the reused for cooling and cooling water on major power plants with flows much total flow. The total flow covered may be heated and reused as process greater than two MGD, which does not remains relatively high, because the water, flexibility is needed in the rule so support the proposition that adverse large flows from a small number of these practices are not discouraged or impacts occur at small facilities with utility facilities dominate the total flow. penalized. They also stated that process lower flows. Rather, the commenters While at a threshold of 25 MGD, 94.9 water cannot be reused in a manner suggest, the threshold appears to be percent of the total flow would still be consistent with closed-loop cooling. designed merely to capture a certain covered, many more facilities would not Some commenters also stated that the percentage of flow. If so, commenters be covered. Only 18 percent of final rule should address situations in assert this threshold is arbitrary and not manufacturers, 17 percent of which the percentages of water used for based on sound science. Some of these nonutilities, and 50 percent of utilities cooling and as process water are not commenters asserted that cooling water would be covered. Thus, 72 percent of
VerDate 11
manufacturers, 83 percent of specific facility or specific cooling water structures, large flows withdrawn for nonutilities, and 50 percent of utilities, intake structure. Section 316(b) applies make-up (i.e., to replace evaporative withdrawing up to 25 MGD would need to any facility that uses a cooling water loss and blow down) can still cause to be addressed on a Best Professional intake structure and is a point source significant impingement and Judgement basis. The Agency is subject to standards imposed under entrainment. Additional controls on concerned about the regulatory CWA section 301 or 306. EPA has intake velocity, flow relative to the uncertainty for regulated new facilities included a flow threshold to provide source waterbody, and design and and the burden on State and tribal some reasonable limit on the scope of construction technologies proposed by permit writers to ensure appropriate the national requirements imposed the facility also represent important requirements for these facilities. EPA under today’s rule. The Agency believes aspects of a cooling water intake also believes that the two MGD those new facilities with withdrawals structure that must, under section threshold reduces the burden on States that are at or below a two MGD 316(b), be addressed. As discussed and Tribes responsible for threshold will generally be smaller elsewhere in this preamble and in the implementing section 316(b) operations that may face issues of Technical Development Document and requirements because, as a national economic affordability and are therefore Economic Analysis, these additional threshold, it reduces the burden more appropriately addressed on a case- measures are both widely employed and associated with site-specific by-case basis using BPJ. Moreover, as affordable. EPA does not believe that a determination of appropriate 316(b) discussed in Section III, EPA does not determination of ‘‘best technology limits. The lower threshold may also agree that adverse environmental impact available for minimizing adverse reduce delays for permit applicants by associated with cooling water intake environmental impact’’ for new providing certain national standards. structures is solely a population-based facilities can omit these low-cost, EPA did not select a 5 or 10 MGD phenomenon. Rather, there can be effective technologies. Also see Section threshold because of the percentage of numerous measures of such impacts, VIII of this preamble for a discussion projected new nonutility and including assessments of fish and that explains the percentage of new manufacturing facilities that would be aquatic organism population impacts. facilities already meeting the final rule excluded from regulation under these Given the language of section 316(b) and requirements and the low cost of these thresholds and concern that future the issues associated with determining requirements. trends in intake flow levels would, adverse impacts, EPA does not view the under these regulatory options, leave examples of cooling water impacts 4. NPDES Permit most new facilities using cooling water discussed in the proposed rule and The proposed rule would apply only exempt from national regulation and NODA as limiting the applicability of to new facilities that are or will be subject to case-by-case determinations this rule to new facilities that have the subject to an NPDES permit. See, by permit agencies. At a threshold of 5 opportunity to employ widely used, proposed 40 CFR 125.81; 65 FR 49116. MGD, only 40 percent of nonutility economically practicable measures that Comments received on this proposed facilities would be covered under this will, at a minimum, reduce injury to requirement generally focus on the new rule. Under a threshold of 10 MGD, 38 large numbers of fish and aquatic life facilities that withdraw cooling water percent of manufacturing and 28 and may result in benefits at higher from waters of the U.S. but do not hold percent of nonutility facilities would be levels of ecological structures. an NPDES permit. covered. EPA did examine the State of Finally, commenters stated that large Some commenters asserted that EPA Maryland’s 10 MGD standard but did facilities that use closed cooling water should not use the 316(b) rulemaking to not find information that would support systems may still require withdrawals of regulate cooling water intake structures the use of this standard on a national more than 2 MGD. These commenters that are not owned by the NPDES- basis. In addition, the trend in power asserted that it is unfair to subject these generation is toward, on a per facility/ facilities to additional regulation after permitted facility. Commenters per unit of output basis, a general they have reduced their intake flow by indicated that such an approach was reduction in cooling water intake flow 90 percent or more. beyond the authority provided by 316(b) levels over time. Combined-cycle gas EPA agrees that very large facilities and would make the rule unnecessarily turbines require less water per unit of that use closed cooling water systems complex. electricity generated than coal-fired or may still require withdrawals of more The final rule applies only to new nuclear facilities. For example, a 750 than two (2) MGD. As discussed facilities that hold an NPDES permit or MW combined-cycle facility with elsewhere in this preamble, EPA are required to obtain a permit. The evaporative cooling towers is estimated determined that reducing intake Agency continues to believe that most to require approximately 7 to 8 MGD capacity commensurate with use of a new facilities that will be subject to this and under a 10 MGD threshold would closed-cycle recirculating cooling rule will control the intake structure not be subject to this national rule. The system is not economically practicable that supplies them with cooling water Agency believes that, given the objective for facilities withdrawing between 2 and and will discharge some combination of of section 316(b), it is undesirable to 10 MGD. However, EPA does not agree their cooling water, wastewater, and exclude such a large plant from this that it is unfair to subject these facilities stormwater to a water of the U.S. rule. As reductions in cooling water to further requirements necessary to through a point source regulated by an intake flow levels occur, the two MGD reduce impingement and entrainment. NPDES permit. Under this scenario, the threshold also ensures that this rule can Section 316(b) requires that the location, requirements for the cooling water serve the State, Tribes, and permit design, construction, and capacity of intake structure will be applied in the applicants by assuring that permits for cooling water intake structures reflect facility’s NPDES permit. new facilities comply with 316(b). the best technology available for In the event that a new facility’s only EPA does not agree that the intake minimizing adverse environmental NPDES permit is a general permit for flow threshold in the applicability impact. While reductions in total intake storm water, EPA anticipates that the portion of this rule must be based on flow may represent the single most Director will write an individual NPDES prior determinations of the degree of significant improvement for new permit containing requirements for the environmental impact caused by a facilities with cooling water intake facility’s cooling water intake structure.
VerDate 11
Such 316(b) requirements could also be specific mortality rates that varied by Another commenter recommended included in the general permit. life stage for bay anchovy (93 to 100 that EPA require antifouling measures at percent), Atlantic tomcod (0 to 64 the construction and operational stages B. Environmental Impact Associated percent), herrings (57 to 92 percent), to minimize intake attractiveness to With Cooling Water Intake Structures white perch (41 to 55 percent), and local fish, diving birds, and marine The proposed rule requested striped bass (18 to 55 percent). The mammals. As stated previously, EPA comment on the scope and nature of study emphasized that the reliability of defers controls for minimizing adverse environmental impacts associated with these estimates was questionable and impacts due to construction of new cooling water intakes. Many comments that various sources of potential bias cooling water intake structures to the were directed generally toward may have caused the estimated rates to authority of existing Federal, State, and entrainment and impingement impacts, be lower than the actual mortality rates. Tribal programs established for this with some discussion of impacts caused The Electric Power Research Institute purpose. EPA believes it is incumbent by intake construction activities. The (EPRI) sponsored a recent review of 36 upon the individual facilities to majority of comments, however, entrainment survival studies, the implement antifouling measures during concentrated on defining adverse majority of which were conducted in operations that are appropriate for the environmental impact and the the 1970s.53 54 The summarized specific characteristics of their approaches that were most relevant for mortality rates described by EPRI were waterbody. As an example, antifouling characterizing adverse environmental in substantial agreement with patterns measures for freshwater systems will be impact, including assessments of reported in the Hudson River summary, different from measures used for ocean population modeling and bioassessment specifically that anchovies and herrings intakes. (See Section VI.E.3.a. below for approaches. had the highest mortality rates (greater more information on fouling controls). than 75 percent), and that temperature Finally, one commenter suggested 1. Entrainment, Impingement, and change seemed to be an important that cooling water intake structures Construction Impacts determining factor. Thus, EPA believes affect many components of an In the proposed rule, EPA requested scientific studies document that ecosystem, not just individual species. comment on the types of impacts entrainment mortality for some species Thus, the regulation should consider attributable to cooling water intake can be quite high. indirect effects on predators resulting structures (65 FR 49072). Most of the EPA recognizes that Track I of the from losses of prey species and overall comments focused on discussion of final rule precludes the use of high- ecosystem effects when evaluating entrainment and impingement impacts volume, flow cooling water systems. environmental impacts. EPA has taken and the impacts associated with However, in today’s rule, under Track II, primarily a technology-based approach construction of new cooling water an intake with the capacity needed to to this national rule. EPA believes that intake structures. support a high-volume, once-through this rule will reduce impacts to One commenter suggested that the cooling system that is shown through predators by dramatically reducing EPA should have scientific analyses to studies to reduce impingement entrainment and impingement of prey support the statement that entrainment mortality and entrainment for all life species and will therefore protect mortality is high. The commenter also stages of fish and shellfish to achieve a ecosystems as a whole. In addition, this stated that, on the basis of recently level of reduction comparable to the rule recognizes that States and Tribes conducted entrainment studies, level that would be achieved by can be more stringent as is consistent through-plant change in temperature applying Track I technology-based with section 510 of the CWA. was the controlling factor for performance requirements at a site EPA also received comments on the entrainment mortality and that would meet the requirements of the documented examples of impingement entrainment impacts could be rule. and entrainment impacts discussed in minimized through use of a cooling Another commenter suggested that the proposed rule. Several commenters water system designed for high volume, many of the more significant argued that it was inaccurate for EPA to low-velocity flow, which would impingement episodes occur in equate the taking of aquatic organisms minimize temperature differential. The conjunction with environmental with environmental impact because commenter also noted that high-volume, phenomena such as low dissolved there was little evidence that intakes, low-velocity-flow cooling water systems oxygen and rapid temperature declines. new or existing, would cause or were would be specifically eliminated by the According to the commenter, these causing adverse impacts. In contrast, proposed 316(b) regulation. phenomena cause the death of many other commenters asserted that, given EPA notes that entrainment studies fish that are then ultimately collected on the tremendous quantity of water that indicate that through-plant mortality intake screens. EPA acknowledges that utilities withdraw and the large number rates of young fish are determined by episodes of low dissolved oxygen and of organisms impinged and entrained by numerous factors. Different species have rapid temperature declines can result in intakes, it was clear that the cooling different tolerance to passage through a fish losses, but does not concur that this process had an adverse impact on cooling system, and mortality rates may is consistently documented as a aquatic ecosystems. EPA believes that differ among life stages of the same significant or sole cause of fish the examples of environmental impact species. A summary of mortality data impingement mortalities. provided in the proposed rule are from five Hudson River power plants illustrative of the types of effects found that mortality rates could be Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory associated with cooling water intakes. 52 Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Several commenters objected to the substantial. The report cited species- by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL/ NUREG/TM–385/V1. use of specific facilities as 52 Boreman, J., L.W. Barnthouse, D.S. Vaughan, 53 EPRI. 2000. Review of entrainment survival representative examples of C.P. Goodyear, S.W. Christensen, K.D. Kuman, B.L. studies: 1970–2000. Report No. 1000757. Prepared environmental impact. They argued that Kirk, and W. Van Winkle. 1982. the Impact of by EA Engineering Science & Technology. EPA focused on a few high-profile, high- Entrainment and Impingement on Fish Populations 54 Some of the studies summarized in EPRI (2000) intake facilities and in some cases used in the Hudson River Estuary: Volume I, are the same ones considered by Boreman et al. Entrainment Impact Estimates for Six Fish (1982). See EPRI (2000) for complete citations of 36 outdated information or misinterpreted Populations Inhabiting the Hudson River Estuary. original studies. results. EPA believes it used the best
VerDate 11
information available for the proposed recurring and nontrivial, perhaps the many studies conducted to date and rule and the final rule. There are few, if defined as the impingement or arguments put forward on this issue any, recent data documenting entrainment of 1 percent or more of the have done little to resolve the current entrainment or impingement rates at the aquatic organisms in the near-field area lack of consensus among the concerned majority of existing facilities. Many of as determined in a 1-year study; (2) parties. Given this background, EPA has the available reports are for larger entrainment or impingement damage as determined to address adverse facilities (for which environmental a result of the operation of a specific environmental impacts as discussed impact concerns were greatest) and cooling water intake structure, below. contain analyses conducted 20 to 25 including a determination of the a. What Constitutes Adverse years ago. Several of the examples cited magnitude of any short-term and long- Environmental Impact Under This Final in the proposed rule were based on term adverse impacts; (3) any Rule? historical data and EPA acknowledges impingement or entrainment of aquatic that the data may not reflect current organisms; (4) a biocriteria approach EPA acknowledges that there are impingement or entrainment rates at the based on a comparison of the multiple types of adverse environmental facility, particularly if technologies and abundance, diversity, and other impact including impingement and other operational measures for reducing important characteristics of the aquatic entrainment; reductions of threatened, entrainment and impingement have community at the proposed intake site endangered, or other protected species; been implemented since the original with similar biological metrics at damage to ecologically critical aquatic study. However, in most cases updated defined reference sites; (5) evaluation of organisms, including important information was not available. To the impacts to protected species, socially, elements of the food chain; extent possible, EPA has supplemented recreationally, or commercially diminishment of a population’s the facility information in the record for important species, and community potential compensatory reserve; losses this final rule to include smaller integrity (including community to populations, including reductions of facilities and updated information. structure and function); and (6) impacts indigenous species populations, Finally, several commenters suggested likely to interfere with the protection commercial fishery stocks, and that there was no need to address and propagation of a balanced recreational fisheries; and stresses to construction impacts in the 316(b) rule indigenous population of fish, shellfish, overall communities or ecosystems as because there were existing Federal, and wildlife. The proposed rule also evidenced by reductions in diversity or State, and local provisions designed to invited comment on whether adverse other changes in system structure or minimize the impacts caused by environmental impact should be function. construction activities. Another defined more broadly to include non- In the preamble to the proposed rule, commenter stated that it was likely that aquatic environmental impacts (e.g., air EPA discussed several other options for the majority of new generation, once- emissions, noise, introductions of non- interpreting adverse environmental through cooling facilities will be using indigenous species) associated with impact. One option would be to look to existing cooling water intake structures technology-based requirements (see section 316(a) of the Clean Water Act for and that it was doubtful that a new Section VI.B.2.e. below). In the NODA, guidance. Section 316(a) addresses once-through facility would be EPA presented another population- requirements for thermal discharge and constructed in an area where significant based approach proposed by industry provides that effluent limitations habitat could be disrupted. In contrast, for defining adverse environmental associated with such discharge should another commenter stated that the impact—‘‘Adverse environmental generally not be more stringent than regulation should address impacts impact is a reduction in one or more necessary to ‘‘assure the protection and associated with new cooling water representative indicator species that (1) propagation of a balanced indigenous intake structure construction, even if creates an unacceptable risk to the population of shellfish, fish, and impacts were not recurring. population’s ability to sustain itself, to wildlife in and on that body of water.’’ Under today’s rule, EPA will support reasonably anticipated The same language is repeated in minimize construction impacts by commercial or recreational harvests, or section 303(d) with reference to total requiring appropriate intake design and to perform its normal ecological maximum daily load (TMDL) listing construction technologies. EPA function, and (2) is attributable to the requirements for waters impaired by recognizes that other Agencies have a operation of the cooling water intake’’— thermal discharge. These statutory prominent role in evaluating and and invited comment on this definition provisions indicate that Congress minimizing impacts related to as well as refinements to three of the intended this requirement to be used in construction activities and definitions discussed in the proposed evaluating the environmental impacts of acknowledges that existing Federal, rule. See, 66 FR 28859–28863. thermal discharges. Some have State, and Tribal programs include Numerous commenters stated that suggested that, since thermal discharges requirements that address many of the defining adverse environmental impact are usually paired with cooling water environmental impact concerns was critical to the 316(b) regulation intake, it may be reasonable to interpret associated with the construction of new because the program is fundamentally the Clean Water Act to apply this intakes. EPA believes that based on minimizing environmental requirement in evaluating adverse implementation of appropriate design impact. Further, commenters suggested environmental impact from cooling and construction technologies and that, without a solid definition of water intake structures as well. existing program requirements will adverse environmental impact, the Commenters have argued that the minimize the environmental impacts of Agency’s ability to interpret, implement, CWA compels EPA to determine that construction. and enforce 316(b)-related actions the objective of section 316(b) must be would be seriously hampered. linked to the 316(a) goal to ensure 2. Adverse Environmental Impact EPA recognizes that since enactment protection and propagation of a The proposed rule discussed six of 316(b), scientists, environmentalists, balanced indigenous population of potential definitions for adverse lawmakers, and regulators have shellfish, fish, and wildlife. EPA does environmental impact: (1) A level of disagreed on an exact definition for not agree that the CWA compels EPA to impingement and entrainment that is adverse environmental impact. Further, interpret adverse environmental impact
VerDate 11
as that term is used in section 316(b) in very few fish that would not result in heavily channelized segment of the the Act by reference to the phrase ecologically relevant benefits. EPA’s Missouri River. The commenter asserted ‘‘balanced indigenous population’’ record at proposal demonstrated that that study results indicated little if any under section 316(a). Because Congress cooling water intake structures do not detrimental impact to the Missouri used different terms in section 316(b) kill, impinge, or entrain just ‘‘one fish,’’ River ecosystem caused by facility than in section 316(a), EPA does not or even a few aquatic organisms. The operations. EPA reviewed the believe the Agency is required to adopt NODA published by EPA provides information summarized by the such an interpretation. When Congress further examples of cooling water intake commenter and finds fault with several includes particular language in one structures that kill or injure large of the statements and conclusions cited section of a statute but omits it in numbers of aquatic organisms. For in the comment. This is discussed another section of the same act, it is example, EPA provided information on further in EPA’s response to comments generally presumed that Congress acted aquatic organism conditional mortality document. intentionally and purposely in the rates for the Hudson and Delaware c. Assessment of Population Modeling disparate inclusion or exclusion. Bates rivers that demonstrated significant Approach v. U.S., 522 U.S. 23 (1997). The usual mortality due to cooling water intake canon of statutory interpretation is that structures. EPA considered this Some commenters asserted that when Congress uses different language information, as well as information in impacts on individual organisms or in different sections of a statute, it does Section III on impingement and subpopulations are not ecologically so intentionally. Florida Public entrainment survival and impact, as it relevant and recommended that EPA Telecommunications Ass’n, Inc. v. deliberated options for the final rule and define adverse environmental impact as F.C.C., 54 F.3d 857 (D.C. Cir. 1995). how adverse environmental impact follows: ‘‘Adverse environmental Instead, EPA believes, consistent with should be defined. Further, EPA impact is a reduction in one or more EPA’s ecological risk assessment considered documents that discussed representative indicator species that (1) guidelines, that it is reasonable to potential consequences associated with creates an unacceptable risk to the interpret adverse environmental impact the loss of large numbers of aquatic population’s ability to sustain itself, to as including impingement and organisms. These potential support reasonably anticipated entrainment, diminishment of consequences included impacts on the commercial or recreational harvests, or compensatory reserve, stresses to the stocks of various species, including any to perform its normal ecological function, and (2) is attributable to the population or ecosystem, harm to loss of compensatory reserve due to the operation of the cooling water intake threatened or endangered species, and deaths of these organisms, and the structure.’’ Under this approach, EPA impairment of State or authorized Tribal overall health of ecosystems. Given all would define unacceptable risk by using water quality standards. The Agency has of these considerations, EPA determined a variety of methods that fisheries long maintained that adverse that there are multiple types of scientists have developed for estimating environmental impact from cooling undesirable and unacceptable adverse (1) the level of mortality that can be water intake structures must be environmental impacts, including imposed on a fish population without minimized to the fullest extent entrainment and impingement; 55 threatening its capacity to provide practicable, even in cases where it can reductions of threatened, endangered, or be demonstrated that the requirement ‘‘maximum sustainable yield’’ (MSY) on other protected species; damage to a long-term basis, as developed under applicable under section 316(a) is being critical aquatic organisms, including 56 57 the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery met. Thus, the objective of section important elements of the food chain; 316(b) includes population effects but is Conservation and Management Act, and diminishment of a population’s (2) the optimum population size for not limited to those effects. EPA’s compensatory reserve; losses to interpretation of ‘‘adverse maintaining maximum sustainable populations, including reductions of yield. environmental impact’’ is discussed in indigenous species populations, more detail below. In evaluating such comments, EPA commercial fishery stocks, and considered the premises underlying b. Approach to Defining Adverse recreational fisheries; and stresses to MSY and the models used by National Environmental Impact overall communities or ecosystems as Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to evidenced by reductions in diversity or EPA received numerous comments on derive MSY. Because the concept of other changes in system structure or its proposed rule asserting that the MSY is based on harvesting adult fish, function. proper endpoint for assessing adverse EPA generally questions whether this environmental impact is at the EPA also invited commenters to approach is directly relevant to egg, population level, that some of EPA’s submit for consideration additional larvae, and juvenile losses associated proposed alternative definitions of studies that documented either with intakes. EPA also notes that the adverse environmental impact would significant impacts or lack of significant models used to estimate MSY do not essentially protect ‘‘one fish,’’ and that impacts from cooling water intake directly incorporate any additional EPA’s alternative for defining adverse structures. Several commenters stressors (such as losses from environmental impact as recurring and submitted reports on manufacturing and entrainment and impingement) to nontrivial impingement and power plant facilities that purported to managed stocks other than fishing entrainment was vague or would lead to demonstrate minimal impact from pressure. Further, it is important to note excessive and costly efforts to protect a cooling water intake. One commenter that NMFS does not always manage submitted three documents for EPA’s stocks to their calculated MSY. In many 55 In re Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Decision review. Another commenter submitted cases, particularly if there is a concern of the General Counsel No. 41, June 1, 1976. information on the Neal Complex over protecting habitat or critical 56 In re Public Service Co. of New Hampshire, facility located on the Missouri River ecosystems, NMFS regulates fisheries (Seabrook Station Units 1 and 2) (Decision of the near Sioux City, Iowa. The commenter based on their ‘‘optimum yield,’’ which Administrator) 10 ERC 1257, 1262 (June 17, 1977). 57 In re Central Hudson Gas and Elec. Corp., described a 10-year (1972–82) study that is less than the MSY. According to the Decision of the General Counsel No. 63, July 29, focused on evaluating the operational Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries 1977. impacts of the Neal facility, sited on a Conservation and Management Act, ‘‘the
VerDate 11
term ‘optimum’ with respect to the yield a precautionary approach,64 particularly coastal fishery populations, EPA firmly from a fishery, means the amount of fish when dealing with complex systems, as believes that protective, risk-averse which * * * is prescribed as such on described below. measures are warranted to prevent the basis of the MSY from the fishery, EPA recognizes that the limitations of further declines or collapses of coastal as reduced by any relevant economic, existing population models, including and other aquatic ecosystems. EPA social, or ecological function * * *’’ models used to manage fisheries, may views impingement and entrainment EPA also considered the relative long- be related to our overall limited losses to be one of many potential forms term success of ongoing fishery understanding of the complexity of of disturbance that should be minimized management practices implemented by aquatic ecosystems and the long-term to avoid further degradation. the National Marine Fisheries Service effects of anthropogenic activities 65 66. Further, it remains unclear whether it and others. Despite the availability of As proposed in a recent journal article, is possible or sufficient to use single state-of-the-art fish population models many of the adverse impacts identified species population assessment models and considerable experience managing for coastal ecosystems, such as estuarine to assess impacts on multiple species, as fisheries, NMFS recently classified 34 eutrophication, loss of kelp beds, coral is often necessary in evaluating percent of their managed fishery stocks reef die-offs, and introductions of impingement and entrainment by as over-utilized.58 EPA agrees with invasive species, were initiated by cooling water intake structures. NMFS fisheries experts and resource managers historical overfishing.67 Losses or now recognizes that improvement in that there is unavoidable uncertainty extinctions of large vertebrate predators fisheries management will require a associated with managing fish and filter-feeding bivalves such as comprehensive, ecosystem-based populations.59 60 61 62 As a recent NMFS oysters caused by overfishing have, over approach and recently convened an advisory panel expressed it, time, resulted in species replacements advisory panel to develop principles ‘‘Uncertainty and indeterminancy are and significantly limited or ceased and approaches for ecosystem-based fundamental characteristics of the interactions between the overfished fishery management. In its report to dynamics of complex adaptive systems. populations and other coastal Congress, the advisory panel noted that Predicting the behaviors of these community species. Historical such an approach will ‘‘require systems cannot be done with absolute overfishing and ecological extinctions managers to consider all interactions certainty, regardless of the amount of precede both modern ecological that a target fish stock has with scientific effort invested.’’ 63 Consistent investigations and the collapse of predators, competitors and prey species; with its own Guidelines for Ecological several marine ecosystems in recent the effects of weather and climate on Risk Assessment, EPA agrees with the times, ‘‘raising the possibility that many fisheries biology and ecology; the conclusions of the NMFS panel that more marine ecosystems may be complex interactions between fishes ‘‘Given the high variability associated vulnerable to collapse in the near and their habitat; and the effects of with ecosystems, managers should be future.’’ 68 Further, because modern fishing on fish stocks and their cognizant of the high likelihood for ecological studies do not typically habitat.’’ 70 EPA supports the ecosystem- unanticipated outcomes. Management consider the long-term historical record, based approach to fisheries management should acknowledge and account for existing fishery resource baselines may advanced by NMFS and recognizes that this uncertainty by developing risk- be inaccurate, and ‘‘Even seemingly this approach will require an in-depth averse management strategies that are gloomy estimates of the global understanding of species interactions. flexible and adaptive.’’ As the panel percentage of fish stocks that are Because the ecosystem-based approach concluded, ‘‘The modus operandi for overfished are almost certainly far too is currently evolving, EPA believes it is fisheries management should change low.’’ 69 Thus, EPA is concerned that unlikely that most existing single from the traditional mode of restricting historical overfishing increased the species population models can fishing activity only after it has sensitivity of coastal ecosystems to accurately account for multiple-species demonstrated an unacceptable impact, subsequent disturbance, making them interactions. to a future mode of only allowing more vulnerable to human impact and EPA also considered information fishing activity that can be reasonably potential collapse. Based on the long- addressing the issue of compensation— expected to operate without term record of anthropogenic impacts to an increase that may potentially occur unacceptable impacts.’’ EPA and other coastal ecosystems, their documented in survival, growth, or reproduction of fishery scientist support the concept of degradation, and their potential a species triggered by reductions in sensitivity to additional anthropogenic population size 71 72—and its application 58 National Marine Fisheries Service. 1999. Our disturbance, as well as the admitted to the section 316(b) rulemaking. In living oceans. Report on the status of U.S. living uncertainty associated with managing particular, EPA sought comment on a marine resources. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA tech. memo. NMFS–F/SO–41. memorandum discussing compensation 64 59 Hilborn, R., and C.J. Walters. 1992. Dayton, P.K. 1998. Reversal of the burden of and the quantity of data required to Quantitative fisheries stock assessment: choice, proof in fisheries management. Science 279:821– calculate compensation factors (DCN 822. dynamics, and uncertainty. Chapman and Hall. #2–020C). This document states that the 60 Hilborn, R., E.K. Pikitch, and R.C. Francis. 65 Fogarty, M.J., A.A. Rosenberg, and M.P. 1993. Current trends in including risk and Sissenwine. 1992. Fisheries risk assessment: use of compensation factors is typically uncertainty in stock assessment and harvest sources of uncertainty. A case study of Georges decisions. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Bank haddock. Environ. Sci. Technol. 26:440–446. 70 NMFS Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel. Aquatic Sciences 50:874–880. 66 Ludwig, D., R. Hilborn, and C. Walters. 1993. 1998. Ecosystem-based fishery management. A 61 Hutchings, J.A., and R.A. Meyers. 1994. What Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and report to Congress. can be learned from the collapse of a renewable conservation: lessons from history. Science 260:17 71 Rose, K.A., J.H. Cowan, Jr., K.O. Winemiller, resource? Atlantic cod, Gadus morhus, of and 36. R.A. Myers, and R. Hilborn 2001. In press. Newfoundland and Labrador. Canadian Journal of 67 Jackson, J.B.C., M.X. Kirby, W.H. Berger, K.A. Compensatory density-dependence in fish Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51:2126–2146 Bjorndal, L.W. Botsford, B.J. Bourque, R.H. populations: importance, controversy, 62 National Research Council. 1998. Improving Bradbury, R. Cooke, J. Erlandson, J.A. Estes, T.P. understanding, and prognosis. In press, Fish and fish stock assessments. National Academy Press, Hughes, S. Kidwell, C.B. Lange, H.S. Lenihan, J.M. Fisheries. Washington, D.C. Pandolfi, C.H. Peterson, R.S. Steneck, M.J. Tegner, 72 Goodyear, C.P. 1980. Compensation in fish 63 National Marine Fisheries Service Ecosystem and R.R. Warner. 2001. Science 293(5530):629–638. populations. In Biological monitoring of fish, ed. Principles Advisory Panel. 1998. Ecosystem-based 68 Ibid. C.H. Hocutt and J.R. Stauffer, pp. 253–280. fishery management. A report to Congress. 69 Ibid. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
VerDate 11
limited to cases in which fishery challenge the scientific underpinnings associated with managing fish stocks managers have extensive data on a fish of these models. and the degree of stock overutilization population and that specific, numerical EPA believes that a population’s despite long-term management efforts compensation values generally are not potential compensatory ability is (see earlier discussion in Section used in the absence of robust data sets affected by all stressors encountered VI.B.2.c.), EPA is concerned about the (i.e., a minimum of 15–20 years of data within the population’s natural range, relative accuracy of these proxies and suggested). Moreover, fish stocks for including takes attributed to individual their overall ability to protect fishery which these robust data sets exist are or multiple cooling water intake stocks. EPA does not discourage generally the highly exploited structures. Thus, even if there is little development of new data sets, commercial and recreational stocks, 73 evidence that cooling water intakes population models, or other scientific and few data exist for most alone reduce a population’s investigations that will improve nonharvested species. This compensatory reserve, EPA is concerned estimates of compensatory reserve or memorandum also noted that in the that the multitude of stressors other parameters that are needed to absence of sufficient data various experienced by a species can potentially understand fishery dynamics. In fact, it 74 proxies are typically used to avoid adversely affect its ability to recover. is EPA’s belief that these developments quantitatively determining Moreover, EPA notes that the opposite are ongoing due to the compensation. effect may occur when populations are acknowledgment—direct or otherwise— low, a phenomenon known as that existing data and models are In general, commenters asserted that ‘‘depensation.’’ Depensation refers to inadequate. Under the consent decree compensation is a well-documented decreases in recruitment as stock size schedule, EPA is required to promulgate property of population regulation and 75 declines. Because depensation can today’s rule based on its interpretation that, despite 30 years of studies, there lead to further decreases in the of current science and EPA agrees with was no evidence that power plant abundance of populations that are all comments discussed above that there impacts alone could reduce a already seriously depleted, recovery are some weaknesses and potential population’s compensatory reserve. may not be possible even if stressors are inaccuracies inherent to existing Other comments specific to the removed. In fact, there is some evidence estimations of compensation. EPA memorandum concurred that, in the that depensation may be a factor in strongly supports additional research absence of sufficient data, compensation some recent fisheries collapses.76 77 78 efforts and the development of may be indirectly assessed using Because EPA’s mission includes expanded fisheries data sets that can be spawner-recruit models and that more ensuring the sustainability of used to fill information gaps and than 100 marine and estuarine shellfish communities and ecosystems, EPA must improve our understanding of the populations are currently managed by comprehensively evaluate all potential complex relationships associated with NMFS and other fisheries commissions threats to resources, and work towards aquatic ecosystems, fishery populations, using these proxies. One commenter eliminating or reducing identified and anthropogenic activities and, provided information pertaining to new threats. EPA believes that cooling water ultimately, assist NMFS and other scientific studies of compensatory intakes do pose a threat to some fishery agencies in wisely managing fishery reserve and large databases containing stocks and through this rule is seeking resources. Because fishery resources are fisheries information that are currently to minimize that threat. EPA also so precious, EPA further contends that under development. The commenter acknowledges that spawner-recruit compensation studies and models asserted that use of meta-analysis— proxies are currently used by several currently under development— defined as the process of combining and agencies to manage fishery stocks. including the data on which they are assessing findings from several separate However, as indicated in the record, based—should be subject to peer review research studies that bear upon a these proxies are used in the absence of and other measures that will ensure common scientific problem—in robust data sets. EPA does not believe their scientific rigor. conjunction with expanded fishery data that simply because an approach is EPA also evaluated information sets will greatly increase the number of currently in place, it constitutes the best submitted by the Utility Water Act species for which scientists can estimate approach. Given the uncertainty Group (UWAG) and the Electric Power compensatory reserves. The commenter Research Institute (EPRI), both in their maintained that more and better 74 Hutchings, J.A. and R.A. Myers. 1994. What can comments and in studies provided to estimates of compensatory reserve will be learned from the collapse of a renewable resource? Atlantic cod, Gadus morhus, of New the Agency after the comment period. In be developed by the end of the decade, Foundland and Labrador. Canadian Journal of summary, these comments and and requested that EPA take this trend Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51:2126–2146. documents asserted that entrainment of into consideration. In contrast, another 75 Goodyear, C.P. 1977. Assessing the impact of very large numbers of eggs, larvae, and commenter asserted that industry power plant mortality on the compensatory reserve early juvenile-stage fish does not abuses compensation theories and of fish populations. Pages 186–195 in W. Van Winkle, ed., Proceedings of the Conference on necessarily meaningfully affect density-dependent models to support Assessing the Effects of Power-Plant Induced populations of the entrained species and their contention that killing millions of Mortality on Fish Populations. Pergamon Press, that substantial percentages of the fish is not ecologically relevant nor does New York, NY. 76 organisms of many species may survive it equate to an adverse environmental Myers, R.A., N.J. Barrowman, J.A. Hutchings, and A.A. Rosenberg. 1995. Populations dynamics of entrainment. Further, these comments impact. The commenter further exploited fish stocks at low population levels. and documents asserted or were contended that there was a lack of Science 26:1106–1108. intended to support the assertion that scientific support for density-dependent 77 Hutchings, J.A. and R.A. Myers. 1994. What can impingement survival was high for models and provided references from be learned from the collapse of a renewable many species and that impingement peer-reviewed journals that critique and resource? Atlantic cod, Gadus morhus, of New Foundland and Labrador. Canadian Journal of often impacts low-value, forage species Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51:2126–2146. when they are naturally prone to 73 Myers, R.A., J. Bridson, and N.J. Barrowman. 78 Liermann, M. and R. Hilborn. 1997. 1995. Summary of worldwide stock and recruitment Depensation in fish stocks: A hierarchic Bayesian seasonal die-off regardless of cooling data. Canadian Technical Reports in Fisheries and meta-analysis. Can J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 54:1976– water intake structures. One of these Aquatic Science 2024:1–327. 1985. comments asserted that EPRI and some
VerDate 11
of the best fishery scientists in the world showed that mortality rates could be a more holistic, ecological perspective, have never identified a site where substantial.81 The report cited species- forage species can have great definitive or conclusive aquatic specific mortality rates that varied by importance in their role as prey for population or community level impacts life stage for bay anchovy (93 to 100 higher trophic levels, including many have occurred from operation of cooling percent), Atlantic tomcod (0 to 64 commercially and recreationally water intake structures as described by percent), herrings (57 to 92 percent), important fish species. In today’s rule, EPA in the proposed rule. white perch (41 to 55 percent), and EPA seeks to minimize impingement In response to comments that striped bass (18 to 55 percent). The losses for all affected species. entrainment of very large numbers of study further emphasized that the eggs, larvae, and other life stages of fish reliability of these estimates was d. Biological Assessment Approach do not meaningfully affect populations questionable and that various sources of Biological assessments and criteria are of entrained species, EPA believes that potential bias may have caused the recognized as important methods for there is evidence that some fish stocks estimated rates to be lower than the gathering relevant ecological data for have been adversely affected by cooling actual mortality rates. EPRI sponsored a addressing attainment of biological water intakes. For example, Atlantic recent review of 36 entrainment survival Coast States have expressed concern integrity and designated aquatic life studies, the majority of which were 87 over declines in winter flounder conducted in the 1970s. 82 83 The uses. EPA invited comment on the populations and have requested that the summarized mortality rates described following discussion and documents Atlantic States Marine Fisheries by EPRI were in substantial agreement that identified potential constraints on Commission conduct a study of the with patterns reported in the Hudson using these methods to determine cumulative effects of cooling water river summary, namely that anchovies adverse environmental impact from the intakes on winter flounder abundance. and herrings had the highest mortality operation of cooling water intake In addition, NMFS documented in rates (greater than 75 percent), and that structures. First, biological assessment several fishery management plans that thermal regimes seemed to be important and criteria methods are still being cooling water intake structures are one determining factors. developed for large rivers and the Great of the threats that may adversely affect Similar to entrainment survival, EPA Lakes, two large waterbody types where fish stocks and their habitats (DCN# 2– notes that studies show impingement many cooling water intake structures are 024M, 2–024N, and 2–024O). EPA also survival is dependent on species located. Second, although biological is concerned that an extensive data set, characteristics such as and life history assessment and criteria guidance has encompassing 20 or more years of stage, swimming ability, etc.84 been published by EPA for small monitoring data, is usually required to Impingement survival is also dependent streams and wadeable rivers, lakes and adequately assess whether or not on the type of technology in place and reservoirs, and estuaries and coastal populations are being affected by the operational aspects of the intake. marine waters, many States and intakes. These long-term data sets are EPA is aware that in some cases, with authorized Tribes have yet to apply not currently available for many species, appropriate technologies in place, these criteria in large waterbodies where and thus it is very difficult to impingement survival may be cooling water intake structures will be confidently state that entrainment has a substantial for some species.85 EPA is located. Most work to date by the States negligible impact on any fish also aware that impingement survival to use these methods was applied to population. EPA also notes that the studies suggest that impingement small streams and wadeable rivers potential compensatory reserve of some survival is low for some species such as where relatively few cooling water fishery stocks can be depleted beyond small bay anchovy and Atlantic intake structures are located. In the point of recovery 79 and that the menhaden during summers in Atlantic addition, although bioassessments and compensatory reserve of many species Coast estuaries.86 EPA does not believe criteria are valuable for evaluating the entrained or impinged by intakes is that loss of such forage species should biological condition of a waterbody, in unknown. For all of these reasons, EPA be viewed as having limited importance complex situations where multiple believes that the potential for simply because they have minimal or no stressors are present (e.g., point source entrainment impacts exists, and that commercial or recreational value. From discharges, non-point source discharges, additional scientific data are needed to harvesting, runoff, hydromodifications, evaluate entrainment impacts on all 81 Boreman, J., L.W. Barnthouse, D.S. Vaughan, habitat loss, cooling water intake affected fish and shellfish populations. C.P. Goodyear, S.W. Christensen, K.D. Kumar, B.L. Kirk, and W. Van Winkle. 1982. The impact of structures, etc.), it is not well In response to assertions that many entrainment and impingement on fish populations understood how to identify all the organisms survive entrainment, EPA in the Hudson River Estuary: volume I, Entrainment different stressors affecting the biology maintains that studies show that impact estimates for six fish populations inhabiting in a waterbody and how best to through-plant mortality rates of young the Hudson River Estuary. Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear apportion the relative contribution to fishes vary depending on numerous Regulatory Research by the Oak Ridge National the biological impairment of the factors. 80 Different species have Laboratory. ORNL/NUREG/TM–385/V1. stressors from each source within a different tolerance to passage through a 82 Electric Power Research Institute. 2000. Review watershed. Thus, it is the opinion of cooling system, and mortality rates may of entrainment survival studies: 1970–2000. No EPA that the existing guidance for differ among life stages of the same 1000757. Prepared by EA Engineering Science & Technology. conducting biological assessments species. A summary of mortality data 83 Some of the studies summarized in EPRI (2000) (particularly within large river systems from five Hudson River power plants are the same ones considered by Boreman et al. and the Great Lakes) and the quantity of (1982). See EPRI (2000) for complete citations of 36 biocriteria data compiled at the State/ 79 Hutchings, J.S. and R.A. Myers. 1994. What can original studies. Tribal level are insufficient at this time be learned from the collapse of a renewable 84 EPRI. 2000. Technical evaluation of the utility resource? Atlantic cod, Gadus morhus, of New of intake approach velocity as an indicator of to apply a biocriteria approach to Foundland and Labrador. Canadian Journal of potential adverse environmental impact under Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 51:2126–2146. Clean Water Act section 316(b). Report No. 100731, 87 Davis, W.S. and T.P. Simon, eds. 1995. 80 EPRI. 2000. Review of entrainment survival EPRI, Palo Alto, CA. Biological assessment and criteria: tools for water studies: 1970–2000. Report No. 1000757. Prepared 85 Ibid. resource planning & decision making. Lewis by EA Engineering Science & Technology. 86 Ibid. Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
VerDate 11
evaluation of cooling water intakes spray drift. Additionally, one They added that while non-aquatic nationally. commenter stated that although there is concerns are valid and should be EPRI also questioned the applicability no express statutory support in section considered secondarily, the main effect of bioassessments for 316(b) analyses. 316(b) for limiting consideration to of these facilities is to the aquatic Specifically, EPRI developed a aquatic impacts (see 33 U.S.C. 1326(b)) communities and the decision-making document that examined the suitability they believe that the analysis of such process should reflect this priority. of multimetric bioassessment for impacts can be appropriate. Further, the Further, one commenter recommended regulating cooling water intake commenter encouraged EPA to consider that the regulation, (and probably more structures under section 316(b) of the non-aquatic impacts which relate to specifically the guidance), allow States, 88 CWA. In its conclusion, EPRI stated cooling towers. Other commenters authorized Tribes, permitting that biocriteria are well suited for stated that Congress’ mandate for authorities, and facility operators to assessing community-level effects, but environmental impact is broader than have sufficient flexibility to consider are not designed as indices for the entrainment and impingement non-aquatic impacts that may result measuring population-level effects impacts upon which EPA has focused in from activities related to the design, without additional analyses; that the proposed regulation. The construction, location, and operation of assumptions about the structure and commenters urged EPA to consider the an intake structure and other alternative function of ecosystems embedded in the following effects of the cooling tower technologies identified as having a biocriteria approach appear to conflict technology: (1) Increased air emission with current understanding of harmful effect on air, lands, and other due to the ‘‘energy penalty’’ exacted by natural resources when making section ecosystems as dynamic, nonequilibrium closed-cycle cooling, or dry cooling; (2) systems structured on multiple time and 316(b) decisions. One commenter noise; (3) visible plumes that (a) are claimed that a large array of space scales; and that issues such as unaesthetic, and (b) contribute to significant uncertainty related to environmental laws and regulations increased fogging and icing on nearby already exist to address non-water identification of reference conditions roadways; and (4) salt drift. The environmental impacts. Some remain unresolved, particularly for commenters added further that of all the commenters asserted that the potential large, open systems such as estuaries technologies associated with cooling for localized impact from wet cooling and coastal marine waters. condenser water, once-through cooling towers is relatively minor given the is the only technology that is not e. Non-Aquatic Environmental Impacts substantial improvements in associated with increased air emissions. EPA invited comment in the proposal entrainment and impingement and the According to the comments, the other on whether adverse environmental elimination of thermal impacts cooling water technologies either impact should be defined broadly to associated with wet cooling as directly emit contaminants into the air consider non-aquatic adverse compared to once-through cooling. environmental impacts in addition to and/or indirectly result in an increase of fuel use and air emissions due to the For the final rule, EPA presented aquatic impacts (65 FR 49075). EPA also estimates of marginal annual increases discussed the water quality and non- loss of electrical generation capacity by in air emissions associated with water quality impacts of cooling towers the power used to operate these installing recirculating wet cooling (both wet and dry) in the proposal (see technologies. The comments stated that, towers in lieu of once-through cooling 65 FR 49075 and 65 FR 49081). In the in essence, the proposed regulations systems. The Agency compared NODA, EPA outlined its methodology pre-determine that air and noise impacts for estimating marginal increases in air are more acceptable than impacts to projected emissions under the rule to emissions from electric generating aquatic resources and water quality. The projected emissions absent the rule. facilities due to the adoption of wet or comments added that the locations least Because EPA projects that, regardless of dry cooling towers (66 FR 28867). likely to be able to comply with the the outcome of the rule (that is, absent Some commenters asserted that EPA requirements, like those in urban areas, the regulations) a majority of power failed to consider potential adverse are also the most likely to have impaired plants would have recirculating wet environmental impacts associated with air quality. One commenter maintained cooling towers and a minority would evaporative cooling towers. One that for recirculated systems, cooling have once-through or dry cooling commenter stated that evaporative tower blowdown must be stored in systems, the number of in-scope cooling towers carry some potential for evaporation ponds or treated prior to facilities contributing to increased air localized impact apart from their discharge, resulting in potential for emissions is small. Regardless, EPA extraction of cooling water, because groundwater impacts and disturbance of estimates that the following annual air they may discharge bacterial slimes, terrestrial habitats. Additional emissions increases will occur as fungi, and a variety of organisms which commenters stated that there could be consequence of the rule: 2,560 tons of colonize the tower but are not otherwise unintended air pollution consequences SO2, 1,200 tons of NOX, 485,900 tons of native to the local ecosystem. The for manufacturers from the 316(b) rule CO2, and 16 pounds of Hg. These commenter added that such organisms due to adoption of cooling towers. The increases represent a change of less than can be suppressed by the use of biocides forest products industry projects an 0.02 percent of annual emissions from that may be discharged with the increase in SO2, NOX, PM, and CO2 power plants in the United States. Air effluent. In addition, the commenter emissions due to increased energy emissions for manufacturing facilities claimed that evaporative towers may demand to run their mills. Other projected within the scope of the rule concentrate nutrients such as commenters stated that EPA must are projected to not increase. This is due phosphates and, when brackish or ensure that new cooling water to the fact that EPA projects marine water is used, discharge salt technologies do not increase fossil fuel manufacturers to utilize reuse and use by manufacturers. recycling of cooling water to meet the 88 EPRI. 2000. Evaluation of biocriteria as a Conversely, some commenters stated flow reduction requirements in lieu of concept, approach, and tool for assessing impacts recirculating wet cooling towers. For the of impingement and entrainment under ;§ 316(b) of that the primary environmental concern the Clean Water Act. Report No. TR–114007, EPRI, with intake structures should be those other regulatory options analyzed for Palo Alto, CA. focused on the aquatic environment. the final rule, EPA presented annual air
VerDate 11
emissions estimates in Chapter 3 of the has done of non-impingement and the waterbody to its designated use. All Technical Development Document. entrainment impacts in the case of new of the leading sources of waterbody To a large degree, issues brought forth facilities would not govern in that impairment—nutrients, siltation, by commenters regarding non-aquatic context. Accordingly, the standard and metals, and pathogens—can affect impacts of cooling towers were highly procedures EPA develops for assessing aquatic life. In the 1998 National Water site-specific. For instance, in the cases adverse environmental impact from Quality Inventory, inability to support where visible plumes from evaporative intake structures at existing facilities aquatic life uses was one of the most cooling towers was a significant issue may well be quite different, and nothing frequently cited water quality concerns. for the public and other stakeholders on in this rulemaking should preclude EPA EPA recognizes, however, that these the local level, alternative or additional from coming to the conclusion that a data do not establish that cooling water technologies have been adopted in different approach for regulating cooling intake structures are the cause of response to stakeholder sentiment. The water intake structures at existing adverse environmental impact in any two-track regulatory framework adopted facilities is warranted. particular case and that there may be by EPA in the final rule allows for this other reasons for the presence of local, site-specific decision-making 3. Additional Information Indicating impaired waters near cooling water process. In the case where facilities, or that Impingement and Entrainment May intake structures, such as the frequent public stakeholders, determine that an Be a Non-Trivial Stress on a Waterbody location of facilities with cooling water alternative technology to a traditional In addition to reviewing the merits of intake structures near other potential flow reducing type (such as a population approach to assessing sources of impairment (e.g., industrial recirculating wet cooling towers or adverse environmental impact, EPA point sources, urban stormwater). cooling ponds) is necessary, the two- considered information suggesting that Nonetheless, this analysis suggests that track methodology provides the impingement and entrainment, in many cooling water intake structures are flexibility for an equivalent aquatic combination with other factors, may be sited within or adjacent to impaired environmental impact minimization to a nontrivial stress on a waterbody. EPA waters, and that intakes potentially occur without producing a non-aquatic recognizes that cooling water intake contribute to existing stress on impact. structures are not the only source of waterbodies and their resident biota. In general, EPA has concluded that at human-induced stress on aquatic EPA also summarized information a national level the primary impacts of communities. These stresses include, from a number of sources indicating this rule will be aquatic in nature, and but are not limited to, nutrient loadings, overutilization of about 34 percent of focus on impingement and entrainment toxics loadings, low dissolved oxygen the fishery stocks whose known status affects. Nevertheless, at a local level, it content of waters, sediment loadings, is tracked by and under National is possible that air quality impacts, non- stormwater runoff, and habitat loss. Oceanic and Atmospheric impingement and entrainment aquatic While recognizing that a nexus between Administration’s (NOAA) purview (54 effects, or energy impacts could be a particular stressor and adverse out of 160 stock groups) and which rely significant and potentially justify a environmental impact may be difficult on tidal rivers, estuaries, and oceans for different approach to regulating cooling to establish with certainty, the Agency spawning, nursery, or adult habitat. An water intake structures. Moreover, the identified methods for evaluating more additional 45 stocks under NOAA cost impact of the rule, under certain generally the stresses on aquatic purview are of unknown status (about local conditions, could be wholly communities from human-induced 22 percent of the fisheries managed by disproportionate to costs anticipated by perturbations other than fishing. Of NOAA) because of incomplete EPA on a national level. EPA believes particular importance is the recognition assessments. In addition, NOAA that it is prudent to make an alternative that stressors that cause or contribute to documents in a number of their fishery regulatory mechanism available to the the loss of aquatic organisms and habitat management plans that cooling water permitting authority to address such may incrementally impact the viability intake structures, particularly once- situations, and to be used at the of aquatic resources. EPA examined through cooling water systems that permitting authority’s discretion. EPA is whether waters meet their designated withdraw large volumes of water, cause sensitive to the large resource burden uses, whether fisheries are in stress, and adverse environmental impacts due to which such flexibility could place on whether waters would have higher significant impingement of juveniles the permitting authority, if this water quality or better support their and entrainment of eggs and larvae. EPA mechanism were abused by permit designated uses if EPA established believes that stress due to applicants. Therefore, EPA is placing additional requirements for new cooling overutilization may be relevant to the burden of demonstration of the need water intake structures. EPA considered assessing cumulative impacts of to pursue such alternative regulatory use of this type of information as one multiple stressors, including cooling limits entirely on the permit applicant. approach for evaluating adverse water intake structures. In this final rule for new facilities, environmental impact. where EPA is concerned about certainty EPA prepared a memorandum C. Location and speed of permitting, EPA has (Dabolt, T. EPA. April 18, 2001, revised The proposed rule outlined a selected impingement and entrainment July 2001. Memo to file Re: 316(b) framework in which intakes located in as the metric for performance. EPA has analysis-relationship of location to certain sections of a waterbody would considered the non-impingement and cooling water intake structures to be subject to varying levels of entrainment environmental impacts of impaired waters) documenting that 99 restrictions. Specifically, intakes located the new facility rule and has found percent of existing cooling water intake within the broadly defined littoral zone them to be acceptable on a national structures at facilities that completed or in especially sensitive waterbodies level. EPA is currently developing EPA’s section 316(b) industry survey are (estuaries and tidal rivers) would face proposed regulations to establish the located within two miles of locations additional restrictions on intake flows best technology available for within waterbodies identified as and intake velocity. Intakes located minimizing adverse environmental impaired and listed by a State as outside these higher priority waters impact from intake structures associated needing development of a total would be subject to decreased levels of with existing facilities. The studies EPA maximum daily load (TMDL) to restore regulation. See the proposed rule for a
VerDate 11
detailed discussion of the framework set impingement and entrainment by using construction technologies after forth. (Section VIII.A.2., pages 49083 to alternative technologies or approaches. considering site-specific conditions. In 49085.) While EPA continues to believe that Track II, permit applicants have Numerous comments were received it could have established different complete flexibility to address site- on the proposed requirements for requirements based on general specific conditions, provided they can location, nearly all of which opposed information about the productivity of reduce impacts to fish and shellfish to the proposal. In the most general sense, water bodies, EPA decided for the new a level comparable to the level that many commenters agreed with the facility rule that introducing separate would be achieved if they implemented requirements for different water bodies concept of protecting waters that are Track I requirements at their site. more productive. However, most was unnecessary in light of the strong commenters also argued that the record support that the track I 2. General Comments on the Use of the proposed approach was scientifically requirements are technically available Littoral Zone Concept and technically flawed and would be and economically practicable for new extremely difficult to implement. The facilities and in light of the flexibility Many commenters made general comments can be divided into several provided by Track II where the statements of opposition to the use of generic categories: importance of applicant demonstrates that it can use the concept of littoral zone as part of the location for an intake, general comments different technologies to reduce impacts proposed rule, each for a variety of on the use of the littoral zone as a to fish and shellfish to a level reasons. Most of the comments regulatory concept, and specific comparable to the level that would be expressed concern over one or more of comments regarding the littoral zone achieved if they implemented Track I the following issues: The proposed definitions for each waterbody type. requirements at their site. definition and approach is too broad EPA did not vary the performance In the NODA, EPA further explored and untenable; the conditions used to requirements based on waterbody type the issue of intake location by soliciting define the littoral zone can vary greatly because it found problems in defining comments on a revised definition of on an annual basis; the proposal is and implementing a littoral zone littoral zone and revised requirements poorly supported by the scientific approach (as discussed below) and for several waterbody types including literature; and the proposal is a poor found that reducing impingement the Great Lakes, and for waters not mortality and entrainment on fresh proxy for biological productivity and designated to support aquatic life use. water bodies to a comparable level as in ignores ecological complexity and site- Comments on the NODA generally estuaries and oceans to be technically specific conditions. In general, reiterated issues raised in the comments feasible and economically practicable. commenters acknowledged that some on the proposed rule. Commenters areas of a waterbody are more sensitive agreed that location is an important 1. Importance of Intake Location to cooling water intake structure factor in assessing the impacts of Several commenters agreed with EPA impacts but disagreed with EPA’s cooling water intake structure, but that that location is an important factor in approach for defining the concept. For creating a regulatory framework to assessing the impact of a cooling water example, the term ‘‘area of high specifically address locational issues intake structure. One commenter added impact,’’ proposed in the NODA, would be extremely difficult. that location is also critical to the represented an improvement over the After reviewing the available data and technical feasibility of the facility, term ‘‘littoral zone,’’ but commenters comments regarding intake location, because the site characteristics with noted that the proposed term still lacked EPA has elected not to vary respect to hydrology, land area a clear definition. One commenter requirements for new facilities on the available, and other factors can greatly further noted that a site-specific basis of whether a cooling water intake influence the viability of a facility. approach would allow for a more structure is located in one or another Other commenters supported the thorough analysis of a waterbody and broad category of waterbody type or in waterbody-specific approach, but in the a broadly defined zone of higher context that adverse environmental account for these sensitive areas. productivity or sensitivity within impact is a site-specific or even species- Another commenter argued that the certain types of waterbody. Instead, EPA specific phenomenon. Another approach was inappropriate, because has promulgated technology-based commenter disagreed with the proposed EPA does not have the authority to performance requirements for new delineation of waterbody types, stating establish less restrictive requirements in facilities that defines best technology that adverse impacts can be found at all some waterbodies. available for minimizing adverse waterbody types and both in and EPA recognizes that most environmental impact in all waterbody outside the littoral zone. Therefore, commenters, albeit for a variety of types. This prescription for best equal protection should be afforded to sometimes conflicting reasons, do not technology available for minimizing all waters under the regulation. One support use of a littoral zone or adverse environmental impact commenter opposed the approach similarly broad concept to specify recognizes the site-specific nature of involving waterbody types, since requirements for best technology biology and other locational factors by defining distinct types is difficult, and available for minimizing adverse allowing the permit applicant in Track noted that a site-specific approach environmental impact. EPA instead has I to select and implement certain design would be more appropriate. Another adopted a two-track framework in and construction technologies after a commenter argued that the effectiveness which permit applicants can fully review of available information on the of intake technologies varies by address site-specific factors in site. Facilities that choose not to follow location, thereby supporting a site- proposing what technologies or the specific technology-based specific approach. performance requirements in Track I EPA agrees that location is an alternatives they will use to reduce may opt for Track II and, after site- important factor in addressing cooling impingement and entrainment to levels specific study, seek to demonstrate water intake structure impacts, and, in readily achievable with use of low-cost, equivalent protection of the aquatic Track I, permit applicants must select widely used technologies. resources in a given waterbody from and implement certain design and
VerDate 11
3. Specific Comments on the Definition the concept that freshwater lakes and alewifes typically inhabit deep, pelagic or Applicability of the Littoral Zone rivers are less vulnerable to the effects waters of landlocked lakes, they migrate a. Littoral Zone—Oceans of impingement and entrainment than to harbors and nearshore waters to other types of waterbodies. spawn in spring and early summer. Most commenters opposed the Today’s final rule adopts a different proposed definition and use for oceanic regulatory framework—a two-track d. Littoral Zone—Estuaries and Tidal littoral zones. Generally, commenters approach—and does not set different Rivers saw it as too broad, vague, and requirements for best technology Commenters were more divided in unsupported by scientific literature, available for minimizing adverse their comments on estuaries and tidal although one commenter did disagree environmental impact for different parts rivers. Some commenters generally with a reduced level of protection for of freshwater rivers. Instead, under supported the proposed definition of an oceanic waters. Some commenters noted Track II, an applicant may conduct site- estuary and the increased level of that the entire continental shelf could be specific studies and possibly determine protection for these waters. Others interpreted as the littoral zone under the that a different cooling water intake noted that the proposed definition proposed definition. Other commenters structure location within the waterbody greatly oversimplified its ecological disagreed with the usage of salinity as would reduce impingement mortality function, since not all areas within an a defining criterion, noting that many and entrainment to a level of reduction estuary are equally productive. Another environmental factors (e.g., seasonality, comparable to the level achieved under commenter noted that the proposed rule tides, weather) can influence the Track I requirements at a lower cost. If applied the greatest level of restrictions salinity levels and therefore alter the so, the applicant is free to propose an to the waterbody type with the greatest geographic location of the littoral zone. alternative location for its intake in its heterogeneity. Several commenters One commenter added that some permit application. expressed concern over the use of estuarine waters could possibly be salinity as a delineation tool, noting the classified as oceanic waters, thus c. Littoral Zone—Lakes and Reservoirs tendency for the 30 ppm gradient to reducing the level of protection required One commenter noted that site- move within the waterbody. by the regulation. Commenters were specific factors must be considered Based on facility size, EPA is setting also asked to comment on a proposed when locating a cooling water intake the same performance-based technology fixed distance from shore as a definition structure. The commenter argued that it requirements for tidal rivers and of the littoral zone. Some commenters was not necessarily true that intakes estuaries as for all other waterbodies did support a fixed distance (from 200 located in the littoral zone of lakes or under Track I of the final rule. To the to 500 meters offshore) but most reservoirs impact more species or extent that site-specific characteristics commenters opposed the proposed species having higher economic value of a proposed facility location make the definition, because of the need to compared to intakes sited offshore. The Track I requirements more or less recognize site-specific characteristics, commenter also stated that based on its effective at reducing impingement and such as biological resources, areas of experience, the dominant species entrainment, the facility choosing to high productivity, and waterbody size entrained and impinged within lake pursue Track II will have a site-specific and configuration, at each facility. Many systems were forage species (e.g., goal for evaluating the efficacy of of the same comments opposing the gizzard shad, alewife, smelt) regardless alternative technologies and fixed-distance approach are echoed in of intake location. approaches. the general comments about the EPA agrees that it is important to 4. Waters Not Designated To Support inadequacy of the littoral zone approach consider site-specific factors when Aquatic Life Uses noted above. identifying the most appropriate For the reasons discussed above, EPA location for a cooling water intake In the NODA, EPA requested has adopted an alternative regulatory structure. As discussed above, under a comment on the issue of less stringent structure and will not in this rule set Track II approach, an applicant may requirements for facilities located on nationally defined areas within oceans conduct site-specific studies to waterbodies that are not designated to where different requirements apply for determine where best to site its intake support aquatic life. One commenter best technology available for (inshore or offshore) as long as it can be supported less stringent requirements minimizing adverse environmental proven that the chosen location would than proposed, requesting that facilities impact. reduce the level of impingement located on waters not designated to mortality and entrainment of all stages support aquatic life be exempt from the b. Littoral Zone—Freshwater Rivers of fish and shellfish to a level of 316(b) regulations. This commenter also Only a few of the comments received reduction comparable to the level the noted that such an exemption would not addressed freshwater rivers and streams, facility would achieve under the Track necessarily be permanent, since States but those few comments raised concerns I requirements. However, EPA does not have the authority to reclassify waters to over the proposed definition of the agree that the susceptible life history again support aquatic life. Another littoral zone. One commenter noted that, stages of lake forage species (such as commenter did not support the generally, the flow, turbidity, and those listed by the commenter) are as proposed approach. A third commenter seasonality at a site can greatly affect the likely to be impinged or entrained at an argued that the CWA does not allow for vegetation and light penetration, thereby offshore intake as an intake located exemptions from technology-based affecting the extent of the littoral zone. inshore. Basic life history information requirements on the basis of the This commenter also added that riverine for many forage species documents that designated use of the receiving waters. intakes are often shoreline intakes and spawning events and juvenile stages Some commenters submitted specific noted that the definition would be often occur in nearshore lake waters. As examples of impaired waterbodies and difficult to apply to intakes because of an example, young-of-the-year gizzard listed nutrient enrichment as one of the hydrologic factors such as meanders and shad form schools and are usually found causes of impairment. shoreline construction techniques. close inshore within shallow waters Today’s final rule does not establish Another commenter submitted overlying mud bottom (Dames & Moore, less stringent requirements for additional data and analysis supporting 1977). Similarly, although adult waterbodies not designated to support
VerDate 11
aquatic life use. However, to the extent limits, and against specific items in each proposed basing the 316(b) that the lack of an aquatic life use would proposed waterbody limitation. requirements more on the overall health result in Track I requirements achieving On the basis of the supporting data and viability of the surrounding aquatic limited reductions in impingement and presented in the proposed rule and the environment than on rates of entrainment at a site, a permit applicant NODA, Track I and Track II of today’s entrainment and impingement. willing to conduct site-specific studies final rule maintain the proposed flow On the other hand, some commenters under Track II might be able to limitations with some changes. EPA supported EPA’s assertion that volume demonstrate that alternative believes the record contains ample and impact are directly proportional. technologies or approaches would evidence to support the proposition that One commenter provided statistical reduce the level of impingement reducing flow and capacity reduces evidence from several cooling system mortality and entrainment to a level of impingement and entrainment, one studies that demonstrated higher rates reduction comparable to the level the measure of adverse environmental of entrainment and impingement when facility would achieve if it met the impact, and may reduce stress on higher intake volumes were increased. Track I requirements at that location. levels of ecological structure including Several commenters questioned EPA’s EPA addressed use impairment and the population and communities. (See, #2– emphasis on reducing intake flow to stress that cooling water intake 029, 2–013L–R15 and 2–013J). EPA also minimize impact while ignoring other structures may add to impaired has determined that a capacity- and influential factors, such as life history waterbodies at VI. B. above. location-based limit on withdrawals in strategy, distribution throughout the certain waterbody types is an achievable water column, and adaptations to D. Flow and Volume requirement that will have little or no external stresses, among others, that can Under the proposed rule, EPA impact on the location of cooling water result in high entrainment and proposed limitations on intake flow and intake structures projected to be built impingement mortality rates. The volume for new facilities that varied over the next 20 years. commenters argued that such factors depending on the type of waterbody can often be mitigated by structural upon which the facility is to be located. 1. Relation of Flow and Capacity to design or location modifications Specifically, intake flows at facilities Impact without incurring the expense whose cooling water intake structure Several commenters disagreed with associated with a reduction in the withdraws from freshwater lakes and EPA’s contention that a high intake flow overall volume of water withdrawn. rivers would be limited to the lower of volume necessarily corresponds to Similarly, other commenters noted that five (5) percent of the source water body higher rates of adverse environmental EPA failed to address technologies and mean annual flow or twenty-five (25) impact. Commenters pointed to several design modifications that could achieve percent of the 7Q10. Facilities located facilities with relatively high intake the desired effect—reduction in on lakes and reservoirs would be volumes that reported no significant entrainment and impingement losses— limited to intake flows that do not loss of aquatic life due to entrainment while still maintaining a high rate of disrupt, alter the natural thermal or impingement. The commenters withdrawal. stratification or turnover pattern (where asserted that, collectively, these cooling EPA believes the record contains present) of the source water except in systems showed no significant impact ample evidence to support the cases where the disruption is on the recovery of impaired aquatic proposition that reducing flow and determined to be beneficial to the species or on the overall health of the capacity reduces impingement and management of fisheries for fish and aquatic population. By contrast, some entrainment, one measure of adverse shellfish by any fishery management commenters faulted EPA’s proportional environmental impact, and may reduce agency(ies). Intakes in tidal rivers and flow requirements for failing to account stress on higher levels of ecological estuaries would be limited to no more for cumulative impacts in waterbodies structure including population and than one (1) percent of the volume of that have been previously designated as communities. (See DCN #2–029 in the the water column in the area centered sensitive. In their view, such waters record for this rule (compilation of about the opening of the intake, with a would suffer a disproportionate impact swim speed data), which demonstrates diameter defined by the distance of one from high intake volumes than would the potential vulnerability of many fish tidal excursion at the mean low water less sensitive waters. Relying heavily on species to impingement. The documents level. The additional requirement of a flow-based requirement would ignore DCN #2–013L–R15 and 2–013J support intake flow commensurate with that of this potentially ecologically harmful the proposition that flow is related to a closed-cycle recirculating cooling effect. entrainment.) The widespread use of water system was proposed for intakes Many commenters also disagreed with capacity-reduction technology at almost located in either estuaries and tidal the notion that flow-induced all proposed new electric generating rivers or the littoral zone of any entrainment automatically equates to facilities and by a substantial number of waterbody. adverse impact. Commenters argued new manufacturers makes capacity EPA requested comment on each that any intake flow would likely result reduction an appropriate component of proposed limitation by waterbody type, in some entrainment loss but that this best technology available for unique situations such as the Great does not substantially harm the minimizing adverse environmental Lakes, and the introduction of more biological community of the source impact at new facilities. EPA disagrees stringent flow requirements for intakes water. To support this, commenters with commenters that other factors in estuaries, tidal rivers, and littoral provided examples that demonstrate influential to impingement and zones. healthy sport and commercial fishing entrainment have been ignored. Both In general, commenters opposed the populations in close proximity to large Track I and Track II of the final rule proposed flow and volume limitations. power plants. Citing these examples, allow for site-specific evaluations in They argued that EPA did not present a commenters argued that EPA’s proposed determining the appropriate link between intake flows and adverse best technology available requirements technologies to be implemented. For impact, that the limits are based on based on entrainment and impingement example, the Design and Construction questionable grounds, and that EPA are overly restrictive and cost Technology Proposal Plan required in lacked the authority to enact such prohibitive. Instead, commenters Track I and the Evaluation of Potential
VerDate 11
Cooling Water Intake Structure Effects measure of judgment was involved in inappropriate. Comments on the NODA in Track II allow for site specific establishing the specific numeric limits generally reiterated issues raised in the consideration of factors other than flow in these requirements and that these comments on the proposed rule. to minimize impacts from impingement requirements are conservative in order Numerous commenters questioned and entrainment. Cumulative impacts to account for multiple intakes affecting the proposed intake velocity are addressed on a case-by-case basis by a waterbody. In particular, the 1 percent requirement on several grounds. Many each permitting authority. value for estuaries reflects that the area of the comments suggested that the proposed requirement is based on 2. Basis for Flow Proportional Limits under influence of the intake will move back and forth near the intake and limited scientific data and Numerous commenters rejected the withdrawing 1 percent of the volume of undocumented or unsupported justification for the flow requirement water surrounding the intake twice a government policies. Commenters proposed by EPA as being too vague and day over time would diminish the generally cited the age of the data used untenable. Specifically, commenters aquatic life surrounding the intake. The to support the requirement, the small questioned the proposed goal of a ‘‘99 5 percent value mean annual flow number of scientific studies upon which percent level of protection’’ for aquatic reflects an estimate that this would the requirement is based, and the communities and how it relates to levels entrain approximately 5 percent of the unclear origins of existing government of protectiveness in other water quality- river or stream’s organisms and a policy policies that advocate using the 0.5 ft/ based programs. Many commenters judgment that such a degree of s requirement. Other commenters stated believed both ‘‘99 percent’’ and ‘‘level of entrainment reflects an inappropriately that the requirement is very protection’’ were vague and called on located facility. Nevertheless, because conservative and still may not prevent EPA to provide more explicit definitions they address important operation adverse environmental impact. A in the final rule. Other commenters situations and appear to be highly number of commenters pointed to other questioned the gain in overall aquatic achievable for new facilities, EPA factors that affect impingement and health that can be achieved by setting believes they are appropriate to this entrainment, such as light, turbidity, the requirement at such a high level. rule. temperature, and fish behavior. Other Several commenters cited other federal These requirements are expected to commenters suggested alternative programs and publications, such as the have little or no impact on the location requirements, including 1.0 ft/s, an Water Quality Standards Handbook, in of cooling water intake structures allowable range of velocity from 0.5 support of their claim that EPA has no projected to be built over the next 20 ft/s to 1.0 ft/s, a species-specific velocity precedent on which to base its proposed years as new facilities have the requirement dependent on the species requirement. Other programs have opportunity to choose sites that meet composition of nearby waters, and a demonstrated that a lower target their specific design and cooling water case-by-case velocity limit. Several protection level is still adequately needs before construction begins. other commenters further noted that a protective of the viability of the total number of existing facilities with intake aquatic environment. Commenters E. Velocity velocities exceeding 0.5 ft/s have been noted that a high standard would 1. Design Through-Screen Velocity as a determined to be in compliance with increase compliance costs significantly Standard Measure 316(b) or to have minimal impacts to while producing no measurable fish populations. Other commenters improvement in the overall health of the Under the proposed rule, any intake questioned the record support for source waterbody and called on EPA to located in a freshwater or tidal river, determining the safety factor used in better justify its support of the proposed stream, estuary, or ocean or within or deriving the proposed velocity requirement. near the littoral zone of a lake or requirement. Some commenters While EPA believes this final rule will reservoir would have to meet a supported the velocity requirement, significantly increase protection for maximum intake velocity requirement: a with one commenter noting that it is aquatic communities, the Agency has design through-screen intake velocity of well-established as a protective determined that the proportional flow 0.5 feet per second (ft/s). requirement and is consistent with the requirements represent limitations on EPA requested comment on the levels of protection required under other capacity and location that are appropriateness of design through- existing regulations. technically available and economically screen velocity as a standard measure Several commenters expressed practicable for the industry as a whole. with 0.5 ft/s as the intake velocity, and concern over the use of design through- EPA examined the performance of the utility and appropriateness of a screen velocity as the proposed existing facilities based on data from the nationally based velocity requirement requirement. Some pointed out that section 316(b) industry survey in terms for the 316(b) regulations. Comments approach velocity has been the accepted of proportional flow to determine what addressed these topics, as well as a standard for measuring velocity and additional value could be used as a range of other issues: problems with questioned the lack of justification for safeguard to protect against biofouling, issues better addressed proposing a different methodology. One impingement and entrainment, through a site-specific approach, commenter noted that a specific especially in smaller waterbodies, applicability to offshore oil and gas measure of velocity may be better suited where multiple intakes are located on facilities, and applicability to existing for the design of a particular intake (e.g., the same waterbody, or in waterbodies facilities. through-screen velocity for a wedgewire where the intake is disproportionately Generally, industry commenters screen and sweeping velocity for an large as compared to the source water thought the 0.5 ft/s requirement to be angled screen). Another commenter body. As discussed in Section V.B.1.c. overprotective and not supported by the opposed the use of design through- above, EPA found most existing scientific literature. On the other hand, screen velocity, arguing that it is facilities meet these requirements. EPA states and public interest groups difficult to measure and does not expects that new facilities would have commenters agreed with this represent the velocity that fish must even more potential to plan ahead and requirement. Commenters also gave detect in order to avoid impingement. select locations that meet these examples of several situations in which Others noted that a through-screen requirements. EPA recognizes that some the velocity requirement would be velocity of 0.5 ft/s would, by definition,
VerDate 11
require an approach velocity of less than would protect 96 percent of the tested EPA recognizes that approach velocity 0.5 ft/s. A commenter also questioned fish. EPA notes that if the permit has been a measurement technique for the appropriateness of using through- applicant does not want to meet the intake velocity in the past. However, screen velocity, because intake screens specific Track I velocity requirement, many recently constructed facilities can easily become clogged or fouled, the applicant can, under Track II, have been designed to meet through- having a dramatic effect on velocity and conduct site-specific studies and seek to screen intake velocity limitations. water flows at and through the screen. demonstrate comparable reduction of Additionally, EPA notes that design Other commenters supported the use of impingement mortality and through-screen velocity will be simpler design through-screen velocity, noting entrainment. This may allow facilities to to measure and therefore be easier to that it has long been the industry and install cooling water intake structures implement on a national level for both regulatory standard for measuring intake with greater that 0.5 ft/s velocities if regulators and facilities than approach velocity. Several commenters suggested they can demonstrate that they would velocity. New facilities can be designed methods for measuring approach have the same reduction of with consideration given to the through- velocity. impingement and entrainment as Track screen velocity requirement, and Finally, several commenters drew I standards which include the 0.5 ft/s designs can be altered accordingly. comparisons with existing velocity limitation on velocity. Additionally, Intake velocity will also be simpler to requirements used by NMFS Northwest past permitting decisions were made measure, as facility engineers can Region. Some of these comments using the best judgment at the time of simply calculate the intake velocity on requested that the proposed requirement the decision. These permitting decisions the basis of intake flow and the intake be fully consistent with the existing should not be interpreted to signify best screen area, as opposed to the more NMFS requirements. Others noted that technology available in future decisions. complex data gathering process the proposed requirements are actually The NODA presented further data on involved in measuring approach more stringent than the NMFS fish swim speeds. The velocity of water velocities near an intake screen. EPA requirements when compared using a entering a cooling water intake structure also recognizes that the approach flow vector analysis, contrary to the exerts a direct physical force against velocity will be less than 0.5 ft/s. The Agency’s statement that the proposed which fish and other organisms must act intake velocity requirement is intended requirements were less stringent than to avoid impingement and entrainment. to be a highly protective requirement. NMFS requirements. An analysis of swim speed data Regardless of the intake structure design Given the compilation of supporting demonstrates that many fish species are or the presence of sufficient detection or data presented in the proposed rule and potentially unable to escape the intake avoidance cues, the intake velocity is the NODA, Track I of today’s final rule flow and avoiding being impinged. EPA low enough to protect of a majority of maintains the proposed intake velocity received or collected data from EPRI fish species. For these reasons, the final requirement of 0.5 ft/s through-screen (see W–00–03 316(b) Comments 2.11), rule maintains the requirement to velocity. The 0.5 ft/s through-screen from a University of Washington study measure intake velocity on a design requirement is well supported by that supports the current National through-screen basis. existing literature on fish swim speeds Marine Fisheries Service velocity and will also serve as an appropriately requirement for intake structures, and 2. Appropriateness of a National protective measure. EPA believes a from references included in comments Velocity Requirement requirement that protects almost all fish from the Riverkeeper (see Turnpenny, and life stages is particularly 1988, referenced in W–00–03 316(b) Numerous comments were received appropriate to provide a margin of Comments 2.06; document found in regarding the appropriateness of a safety when, as is common, screens DCN #2–028B in the record for this national-scale requirement for intake become occluded by debris during the rule). These data were compiled into a velocity. Many commenters expressed operation of a facility and velocity graph (Swim Speed Data, DCN #2–029 concern that a national requirement increases through the portions of a in the record of this rule). The data would be an unnecessary burden on screen that remain open. EPA notes that suggest that a 0.5 ft/s velocity would facilities. Specifically, some more than 70 percent of the protect 96 percent of the tested fish. commenters noted that a site-specific manufacturing facilities and 60 percent In developing the intake velocity framework for the 316(b) rule and of the electricity generating facilities requirement, EPA assumed a flat screen velocity requirement would be built in the past 15 years have met this with the intake flow directly preferable, as it would best account for requirement and believes the perpendicular to the face of the screen, site-specific details, some of which may requirement is an appropriate because this is a typical arrangement for affect the rates of impingement and component of best technology available a cooling water intake structure. entrainment. Other commenters for minimizing adverse environmental However, angled screens, such as those questioned using a national impact at new facilities. described in the NMFS requirements, requirement; given the variability in As documented by the data collected are used in some intake designs, and environmental conditions and fish swim for the NODA, EPA believes the 0.5 ft/ EPA does not wish to discourage any speeds, these commenters said making a s requirement is scientifically based, intake designs. Under § 125.84(e), the national approach is inappropriate to technically sound, protective of aquatic Director may require additional controls suitably cover the range of organisms resources, and technically available and (such as the NMFS requirements) to found in a given water body. Some economically practicable as complement the protection afforded by commenters noted that the velocity demonstrated by the fact that it is the velocity requirement. EPA also requirement might preclude the future frequently achieved at recently built developed the velocity requirement use or implementation of some highly facilities. As discussed below, the with a highly protective intake velocity effective technologies. One commenter requirement is well supported by in mind, regardless of the intake noted that several studies have existing literature on fish swim speeds configuration. As a result, EPA’s suggested little or no correlation and will also serve as an appropriate requirements may be more stringent between flow and impingement or protective measure, since the data than existing requirements required by entrainment; the commenter argued suggest that a 0.5 ft/s intake velocity NMFS or other agencies. that, therefore, a relationship between
VerDate 11
impingement or entrainment and intake increase treatment efforts. Frequently, Some commenters noted that intakes velocity does not exist. these efforts involve adding chemical located on large or fast-moving As documented by the data collected treatments to water flows and may have waterbodies may have difficulty for the NODA, the 0.5 ft/s requirement subsequent adverse impacts on water maintaining the proposed intake is scientifically based, is protective of quality. Another management strategy velocity. For example, an intake located aquatic resources with a reasonable noted by a commenter is to maintain in a river moving at 3.0 ft/s may be margin of safety, and is met by many sufficiently high intake velocities to unable to maintain a constant 0.5 ft/s recently built facilities. EPA believes it preclude colonization by fouling intake velocity because of the ambient is an appropriate component of best organisms. One commenter also flow. As for the biota near the intake, technology available for minimizing expressed concern over the implications the commenters submitted that these adverse environmental impact at new of biofouling at fine mesh screens and organisms have adapted to a higher- facilities. Permit applicants who wish to the potential for these protective velocity environment and do not build a facility using higher intake technologies to become quickly fouled. necessarily require protection under a velocities have the option, under Track One commenter supported the velocity velocity requirement. Other commenters II, to conduct site-specific studies and requirement, noting that commercially noted that the direction of flow near an seek to demonstrate that their available alloys have been shown to be intake can have a substantial effect on alternative will reduce impingement highly effective in repelling biofouling the intake velocity and detection by mortality and entrainment to a level of organisms. fish. For example, the intake velocity at reduction comparable to the level the EPA recognizes that maintaining an intake subject to tidal movements or facility would achieved if it met the sufficiently high intake velocities is one a longshore current may be affected. Track I requirements, including the possible solution for minimizing Another commenter expressed concern velocity limit of 0.5 ft/s. settlement by biofouling organisms. that the intake velocity is meaningful While EPA acknowledges that However, further research by the only if measured where the screen is the multiple factors may affect impingement Agency suggests that this is not the most first component of the cooling water and entrainment at a given intake, EPA effective technique. Often, intake intake structure encountered by an believes that there is ample evidence velocities are designed to be as low as organism, such as with a wedgewire contained in the record to support a possible to reduce the impingement and screen. Intake canals, trash racks, and correlation between velocity and/or entrainment of aquatic organisms. other cooling water intake structure flow and impingement and entrainment. Additionally, the intake systems of components pose a threat by potentially As stated in the preamble to the rule, many facilities are unprepared to entrapping fish that are unable to locate intake velocity is one of the key factors support such high intake velocities and an escape route. One commenter noted affecting the impingement of fish and would possibly require modifications in that experimental technologies, such as other aquatic biota. The velocity of order to maintain such velocities. An strobe lights, sound, or intake velocities water entering a cooling water intake analysis of facility survey data at greater than 0.5 ft/s (up to 10 ft/s for structure exerts a direct physical force existing facilities suggested that only 33 some technologies) may not be against which fish and other organisms (3.4 percent) of 978 surveyed facilities developed because of the restrictions on must act to avoid impingement and have intake velocities of sufficient intakes. One commenter observed that a entrainment. The compilation of swim magnitude (greater than 5 ft/s) to inhibit reduction in intake velocity may also speed data (DCN #2–029 in the record biofouling. Fortunately, a variety of reduce the amount of cooling water of the rule) demonstrates that many fish viable alternative technologies and taken in by a facility. The commenter species are potentially unable to escape management strategies for dealing with observed that reducing the cooling the intake flow and avoid being biofouling are available. Examples of capacity of the cooling system may impinged. The record also supports the these options include the use of adversely affect facility safety and proposition that flow is related to construction materials that inhibit efficiency. entrainment.89 attachment of organisms, mechancial For faster-moving waterbodies and in Finally, EPA chose a national cleaning, and chemical and/or heat other situations where a permit requirement in order to provide a treatments. While no one strategy has applicant may wish to use a higher consistent standard for facilitating been shown to be universally intake velocity, facilities may opt to implementation given the technical applicable, there are certainly affordable follow Track II and seek to demonstrate availability and economic practicability and implementable options. that reductions in impingement of the requirement. Maintaining a high intake velocity has mortality and entrainment would be 3. Other Comments Concerning the not been shown to be the most effective comparable to the level achieved with Velocity Proposal way to control biofouling, since other the Track I requirements. Given the data methods have been shown to be more EPA has seen on the protective nature a. Biofouling at Intakes effective at a lower cost, especially in of the 0.5 ft/s requirement (see DCN #2– Several commenters submitted that an the context of new facilities. A facility 028 in the Docket for the rule), EPA intake velocity of 0.5 ft/s may lead to that has yet to be constructed can does not foresee a significant issue increased difficulties with biofouling at integrate biofouling control technologies regarding entrapping fish and will facility intakes, especially at offshore oil into its design and minimize the continue in Track I to specify design and gas extraction facilities. Another impacts of biofouling on normal through-screen velocity as the measure commenter noted that with an increase operations. for determining compliance with the in biofouling facilities would need to velocity requirement. EPA also notes b. Concerns Better Addressed by a Site- that facilities wishing to employ Specific Approach 89 The documents DCN# 2–013L–R15 (Goodyear. developmental technologies may follow 1997. Mathematical Methods to Evaluate Several commenters raised other Track II and demonstrate a comparable Entrainment of Aquatic Organisms by Power Plants) concerns about the proposed velocity level of protection. and DCN# 2–013J (EPRI. 1999. Catalog of Assessment Methods for Evaluating the Effects of requirement, pointing to a variety of For new facilities, EPA does not Power Plant Operations on Aquatic Organisms.) in issues that they argue could be more anticipate that cooling system safety for the record of the rule both support this premise. easily addressed on a site-specific level. nuclear-fueled facilities will be an issue
VerDate 11
because any requirements can be freedom from water dependency, the The cost of dry cooling systems is addressed through facility design. New comments assert, allows new power discussed in a variety of comments. facilities have the opportunity to plants to locate in close proximity to the Generally, all commenters discuss address and mitigate safety and end users of electricity, thereby elevated capital and operating and efficiency issues during the design of decreasing energy loss due to maintenance (O&M) costs in comparison the facilities. The fact that 79 percent of transmission, and to use alternative with similar capacity recirculating wet power generating plants and 46 percent sources of water such as treated cooling towers. An analysis of modeled of manufacturing facilities built within wastewater effluents, municipal new combined-cycle plants in five the last five years meet the Track I supplies, and groundwater. EPA regions of the United States was velocity requirement demonstrates that rejected dry cooling for the reasons submitted with one comment. This facilities designed in accordance with discussed at V.C above. analysis estimated that capital and total this requirement can incorporate any Some commenters asserted that dry O&M costs for dry cooling systems necessary features to ensure proper cooling systems are not necessary for exceed those for wet cooling systems by minimizing adverse environmental functioning of the cooling system. greater than 75 percent, regionally and impact nor do they qualify as the best nationally. Other commenters F. Dry Cooling technology available. They assert that generically assert that the capital and In the proposed rule EPA requested dry systems are not considered to be a comment on regulatory alternatives viable, cost-effective design choice operating costs of the technology based wholly or in part on a zero-intake unless there are unique circumstances significantly exceed those of flow (or nearly zero, extremely low- and conditions associated with either recirculating wet cooling towers of flow) requirement commensurate with the site or the market climate for the comparable capacity. Even commenters levels achievable through the use of dry project. The comments recommend that in favor of dry cooling as the best cooling systems. See, 65 FR 49080– adoption of dry cooling systems be left technology available acknowledge that 49081. EPA rejected dry cooling as best to the permittee’s judgment and not be the cost of a dry cooling system can be technology for minimizing adverse a uniform requirement. The physical as much as three times that of a environmental impact for the reasons space requirements, the commenters comparable wet cooling system. discussed in Section V.C above. assert, severely limit the siting options However, these commenters also contest Some commenters, citing several available to new facilities. They oppose that the cost of the technology is clearly examples, responded that dry cooling the imposition of dry cooling in not wholly disproportionate to the systems must be the best technology southern climates, where, they claim, environmental benefit gained. These available for minimizing adverse there is an abundance of high volume commenters in favor of dry cooling as environmental impact because they surface water available for cooling. the best technology available claim that reduce intake volume and the killing of Additionally, the commenters claim that the capital cost and O&M costs of air- aquatic organisms to extremely low dry cooling has not been shown cooled structures at combined-cycle levels. These comments claim that dry necessary for minimizing adverse electric generating plants represent a cooling is an available and environmental impact. They also small fraction, only 2 to 3 percent (using demonstrated technology. They focus on contest claims made by other EPA’s proposal cost estimates), of the several demonstrated cases of dry commenters on the proposal that dry estimated annual revenues for those cooling and discuss its use for a range cooling has been demonstrated for a facilities. These commenters state that of fuel sources, ownership categories, variety of climates and generating because newer combined-cycle plants climates, and electric generating capacities. These commenters counter need cooling only for the steam portion capacity. The comments claim that dry claims made by other commenters on of their cycle (only about one-third of cooling technology in the United States the proposal that dry cooling is a their total capacity), they can be cooled has been growing rapidly since the early demonstrated technology for large-size with a much smaller dry cooling system 1980s and represents approximately 27 power plants. EPA has rejected dry than a comparably sized, steam-only percent of new capacity since 1985. cooling as best technology available for Additionally, commenters in favor of generating plant. Thus, these the reasons discussed at V.C above. commenters claim, the increased cost the dry cooling alternative state, on the Other commenters discuss dry cooling for dry cooling is considerably smaller basis of recent construction trends, that technologies at manufacturing facilities. the best technology available for the The commenters challenge the viability than it would have otherwise been for New England region is dry cooling of dry cooling systems in manufacturing conventional all-steam plants. These systems. The commenters provide facilities that cool process fluids to commenters add that they believe the examples of 15 steam electric stations ambient levels (e.g., below 100 degrees costs of installing dry cooling as the best currently operating, under construction, F) or do not condense steam. They claim technology available at a fraction of a or recently approved for construction that the dual use of process and cooling cent per kilowatt hour, would not be felt using dry cooling in New England. water prevents the application of dry or even noticed by consumers. EPA These projects range in capacity from 24 cooling. EPA agrees that dry cooling discusses the costs of dry cooling MW to 1500 MW, with an average technologies for manufacturing cooling extensively in Chapter 4 of the capacity of 480 MW and a total capacity waters pose engineering feasibility Technical Development Document. EPA of 7200 MW. Commenters supporting problems. EPA rejects dry cooling as a agrees with commenters that elevated the dry cooling alternative claim that basis for a national requirement for new costs of the technology as compared the technology frees the industry user manufacturing facilities (as discussed in with other cooling technologies pose a groups from unnecessarily restrictive Section V.C above) but points to several significant implementation problem for requirements to site facilities adjacent to demonstrated cases of dry cooling for new facilities. Specifically, as discussed or short distances from waterbodies or cogeneration plants at or adjacent to in Section V.C above, the compliance other sources of cooling water and manufacturing facilities as costs of dry cooling based requirements eliminates discharges (of both thermal encouragement for cogenerating plants would result in annualized compliance pollution and water conditioning to consider the technology on a site- cost of greater than 4 percent of chemicals) to these waterbodies. This specific basis. revenues for all 83 electricity generators,
VerDate 11
and of greater than 10% of revenue for EPA requires of the electric industry for For the final rule EPA concludes that 12 of the 83 generators. reductions in NOX and SO2 emissions. dry cooling systems are not the best The performance of dry cooling The performance penalties of dry technology available for minimizing systems is addressed in many cooling systems play a significant role environmental impact. EPA recognizes comments. Some comments point to in EPA’s decision to reject dry cooling that dry cooling systems can achieve lower performance than wet cooling as the best technology available. See significant reductions in the systems and greater sensitivity to Section V.C above for further impingement and entrainment of climatic conditions as being crucial for discussion. aquatic organisms compared with other evaluating the efficacy of the Hybrid wet and dry cooling systems cooling systems, especially once- technology. These comments claim that are addressed in several comments. One through systems. Additionally, EPA depending on climatic conditions, commenter contends that the viability of acknowledges that the technology has certain locations in the country will hybrid systems for large-scale cooling been demonstrated as a viable cooling have a higher probability of incurring operations (e.g., at a power plant with alternative for certain power plant energy penalties. These commenters cite capacity greater than 500 MW) is applications under certain performance drawbacks to dry cooling uncertain. The commenter identifies circumstances. EPA notes, however, that systems due to operation at elevated site-specific performance advantages of few of the plants constructed with the turbine backpressures or reductions in hybrid systems over dry cooling, noting technology have been built with cooling energy production in locations with that the most common type of hybrid systems of a size comparable to what high daily or seasonal dry-bulb system is designed to eliminate visible would be required at several of the temperatures. One commenter provided plumes from wet cooling towers. These planned coal-fired systems EPA projects results from a modeling exercise comments additionally claim that within the scope of the rule. The dry simulating energy inefficiency impacts hybrid plume abatement systems are not cooling technology presents flexibility at dry cooling facilities in a variety of water-conserving systems and that their to power plants, especially those of climatic conditions. The results from costs are greater than wet cooling tower small size, those locating in arid the commenter’s analysis showed systems. EPA considers hybrid cooling regions, and those with water scarcity summer peak performance shortfalls systems not to be adequately issues, or those wishing to avoid NPDES (i.e., peak energy penalties) of greater demonstrated for power plants of the permitting issues. However, the than 30 percent for dry cooling size projected to be within the scope of technology presents several clear facilities. Additionally, the commenters the rule. As such, EPA has not adopted disadvantages that prohibit its adoption estimate that the energy penalty would the technology as a component of the as a minimum national requirement or vary considerably throughout the best technology available requirements as a minimum requirement for United States because of climactic of today’s rule. However, EPA subcategories of facilities. Although conditions. Conversely, some recognizes that there is distinct EPA recognizes that the technology—by commenters claim that the energy potential for the use of hybrid cooling using extremely low-level or no cooling penalty from some dry cooling facilities systems, especially in cases where water intake—reduces impingement and in some areas is equivalent to that plume abatement is concerned. entrainment of organisms to calculated by New York State officials Some commenters claim that air dramatically low levels, EPA interprets for the Athens Generating Company emissions from electricity generation the use of the word ‘‘minimize’’ in CWA facility, where they estimated a 1.4 to would increase because of energy section 316(b) to give EPA discretion to 1.9 percent reduction in overall plant penalties from dry cooling systems. consider technologies that reduce but do electrical generating capacity as a These commenters state that an energy not completely eliminate impingement consequence of using a dry cooling penalty creates a need for replacement and entrainment as meeting the system versus a hybrid wet’dry power, which must be met by even more requirements of section 316(b) the CWA. 90 system. The commenters add that, in new generating capacity resulting in an A minimum national requirement their view, energy conservation increased potential for environmental based on dry cooling systems would measures can more than offset any impacts (such as increased air result in annualized compliance cost of potential minor loss of efficiency from emissions). The comments add further greater than 4 percent of revenues for all dry cooling. The commenters claim that that estimating those emissions would 83 electricity generators, and of greater the building of modern generating project the costs of power production than 10% of revenue for 12 of the 83 facilities provides significant efficiency and the mix of generating capacities generators. Because the technology can gains that dwarf any potential loss due (e.g., coal-fired, nuclear) available at the cause inefficiencies in operation during to the cooling system design. These time of anticipated demand. Other peak summer periods and in hot commenters claim that transmission commenters take the view that climates, adoption as a minimum losses exceed the energy penalty increased air emissions due to dry national requirement would also impose associated with the dry cooling system; cooling systems are not a concern. EPA unfair competitive disadvantage for further, they assert that because dry is concerned about the degree to which facilities locating in hot climates, more cooling makes it possible to locate away dry cooling-based requirements would so than a traditional recirculating wet from major bodies of water and closer to increase air emissions associated with cooling tower or once-through cooling energy users, a facility can be more than electricity generation. In the cases system. For the subcategory of facilities compensated for the energy penalty. where performance penalties are high in cool climatic regions of the United Finally, the commenters state that a 1 to (i.e., in hot climates or during hot States, adoption of a requirement based 2 percent loss for the sake of greater climatic periods), the increases in air on dry cooling for these facilities would protection of water resources is emissions due to the potential adoption also impose unfair competitive comparable to other efficiency penalties of dry cooling-based requirements are of restrictions. The competitive concern to the Agency. This issue is disadvantages relate primarily to the 90 State of New York, Department of Environmental conservation. 1999. Initial post further discussed in Section V.C in the capital and operating costs of the dry hearing brief, Athens Generating Company, L.P. context of EPA’s rejection of dry cooling system. Additionally, adoption Case no. 97–F–1563. cooling. of requirements based on dry cooling for
VerDate 11
a subcategory of facilities with a biological characterization to establish utility industry stated that the capacity under a particular level or by an initial baseline for evaluating additional time may result in fuel type would pose similar potential impact from the cooling water construction delays that would threaten competitive disadvantages for those intake structure before the start of the availability or price structure of facilities. EPA’s record demonstrates operation. The study required that electricity in certain areas. that dry cooling systems generally cost information be collected over a 1-year In addition, some commenters stated as much as three times more to install period. This information was needed to that there may be no need for a study and construct than a comparable wet determine the kinds, numbers, life if highly protective technology such as cooling system. Dry cooling system stages, and duration of aquatic closed-cycle cooling is proposed to be O&M costs range from less than or organisms in the vicinity of the cooling used by the permittee, especially if the comparable to those for wet systems to water intake structure. The Director facility is located on a large waterbody. two or more times higher. In addition, would use the findings of the study to Some commenters suggested that the dry systems generally impose an energy evaluate the efficacy of the location, studies be required only if alternative penalty as compared with wet cooling flow, and velocity requirements and to requirements were requested and not if systems. EPA estimates the annual define the need for design and the strict technology-based requirements average energy penalty to be 3 percent construction technologies. The are adopted. One commenter questioned over a recirculating wet cooling tower regulations would have also required the need for reevaluating the baseline system. facilities to conduct impingement biological characterization for the next Further, EPA considers the degree of monitoring over a 24-hour period once permit term. energy inefficiency associated with dry per month and entrainment monitoring In response to these comments, EPA cooling to be counter to the performance over a 24-hour period no less than has modified the baseline biological of the best technology available biweekly during the period of peak characterization requirements in the candidate technology. EPA’s record reproduction and larval abundance. rule to allow for the use of existing data, shows an annual average energy penalty After two years, the permitting agency both for the initial permit issuance and for dry cooling of approximately 3 would be allowed to reduce the reissuance. In today’s final rule, Track I percent relative to recirculating wet frequency of impingement and specifies highly protective technology- cooling towers. This energy penalty entrainment monitoring. EPA’s July based performance requirements and represents the typical performance of a 2000 information collection request does not require a permit applicant to dry cooling system in northern climates, estimated costs for the Source Water conduct monitoring prior to submitting extended to the rest of the national Baseline Biological Characterization at an application. The applicant must climates. However, the peak summer an average of $32,000. Monitoring was gather existing information on the site performance is expected to decrease estimated at approximately $38,000 and select design and construction significantly in certain hot climates. annually for entrainment and $13,000 technologies that will minimize EPA estimates that, for a newly annually for impingement. The NODA impingement and entrainment and constructed and designed facility, the provided updated costs for both the maximize impingement survival. Under peak summer shortfall could exceed the source water baseline characterization Track II, the applicant must conduct a annual penalty by an additional 3 and post operational monitoring. considerably more rigorous study if he percent. This value could increase or she seeks to demonstrate that significantly as the facility ages; it 1. Need for the Source Water Baseline alternatives to the Track I requirements hinges on regular and thorough Biological Characterization will reduce the level of impingement maintenance. Numerous commenters from both the mortality and entrainment to a level of EPA concludes that the air emissions States and the industry agreed that the reduction comparable to the level the increases from power plants due to source water baseline biological facility would achieve if it met the adoption of a requirement based on dry characterization was reasonable to Track I requirements at a site. cooling would be counter to the determine the condition of the aquatic 2. Cost of Source Water Baseline performance of a best technology system. Other commenters questioned available candidate technology. Changes the need for a 1-year study that would Biological Characterization in energy consumption associated with provide information of limited utility Numerous commenters stated not dry cooling would result in changed because of the variation that natural only that the proposed sample fuel consumption and therefore could populations exhibit from year to year. collection was time consuming but also result in greater air emissions from Some commenters were concerned that that the analysis and identification of power plants using dry cooling than the baseline year may not be the samples of aquatic insects and would occur if the plants used wet representative of the average ichthyoplankton were extremely labor cooling. EPA estimates that the average characteristics of the organisms and that intensive. Some commenters suggested annual air emissions for the power comparing subsequent monitoring with that the studies be required only if plants in scope of the final rule with a the baseline may provide erroneous alternative requirements were requested dry cooling alternative for CO, NOX, conclusions. and not if the strict technology-based SO2, and Hg emissions would be greater Some commenters expressed their requirements were adopted. than if the plants used wet cooling. See concern that the requirement to perform Numerous commenters stated that Section VI.B.2.e. See Chapter 3 in the the baseline biological characterization existing qualitative information is Technical Development Document for would delay issuance of an NPDES already available on aquatic species at more information on EPA’s air permit and that the time required to many sites located on major emissions analysis. develop the study in cooperation with waterbodies. At these sites, little and with approval from the permitting additional information would be G. Implementation-Baseline Biological authority would increase the provided by an additional year of Characterization development time by 3 to 6 months. sampling in the vicinity of a proposed In the proposed regulations, the They estimated that the time to perform cooling water intake structure. These Agency proposed that all facilities the study would be approximately 18 to commenters would like the Agency to perform a source water baseline 21 months. In particular, the electric prepare additional guidance as to when
VerDate 11
existing information would be expected to be less burdensome, quantity of energy to end-users. The appropriate. Another commenter requiring only monthly surveys for commenters state that replacing this questioned the acceptability of existing impingement and entrainment and power from other higher-cost sources information that is more than 5 years possibly species identification. This will result in social costs for which EPA old, because of changes in water quality, level of effort is considerably less than has not accounted. As a result of species composition, and other the monitoring conducted under performance penalties, according to the variables. previous section 316(b) studies and is commenters, the quantity of fuel One commenter stated that the study therefore less costly. required to generate the same quantity should be tailored to the needs of the of energy increases. They add that site. The commenter stated that some 3. Impingement and Entrainment recirculating cooling towers may result static or controlled environments might Monitoring in the following additional require a less rigorous study, while Some commenters requested that environmental impacts, for which EPA more complex and changing impingement and entrainment has not accounted: visibility impacts environments might require a more monitoring not be required if the strict from recirculating cooling towers, local rigorous study to fully characterize the technology-based requirements were climate change from wet cooling tower site. Other commenters stated that the adopted by a facility. They thought that plumes, wildlife losses (e.g., birds requirements in the regulation were installing the technology should be colliding with towers), fish losses due to ambiguous. adequate to show compliance and to loss of heated aquatic plumes to over- Commenters were concerned that the demonstrate that the objectives of wintering habitats, increased air costs estimated for the proposed rule, at section 316(b) had been met. Other emissions from sources replacing lost an average of $32,000, were commenters suggested that power, and increased impediments to unrealistically low and that a more postoperational monitoring be waterway navigation due to icing in reasonable estimate might be $100,000. implemented on a site-by-site basis northern regions. Some commenters stated that the where there is evidence that EPA initially responded by providing estimate for a proper characterization unanticipated potential impacts could information in the NODA regarding this study would be 10 times the original occur or where habitat restoration has subject and outlined its intent to estimate. One commenter stated that the restored aquatic populations. account for some additional costs in the $32,000 may be low even for a paper EPA disagrees with commenters who final rule (66 FR 28866 and 28867). The study, stating that a simple study with advocate no impingement and cost estimates for the final rule include the barest scope of work would cost in entrainment monitoring during the consideration of performance penalties excess of $50,000 while impingement permit for permittees who opt to meet and other environmental issues and entrainment monitoring would cost the Track I requirements. The Track I highlighted by the commenters. The approximately $100,000–$150,000 per requirements for design through-screen final rule accounts for the ‘‘energy year. velocity and for selecting and installing penalty’’ for facilities that are projected Some commenters stated that the design and construction technologies to install recirculating wet cooling tower costs EPA estimated were too low in that minimize impingement mortality systems in lieu of once-through cooling light of the accuracy that would be and entrainment require the permittee systems. EPA estimated marginal needed to determine whether significant to install and operate technologies that performance penalties, the costs to adverse environmental impact exists require periodic maintenance and replace the lost power due to these and whether further mitigative measures operation in a prescribed manner. penalties, and the increased air or technologies must be used and that Periodic monitoring is appropriate. The emissions of the penalties. Additionally, the characterization will also serve as permit director also must determine for visibility impacts from cooling towers, the benchmark against which future each permit renewal whether additional local climate change from wet cooling performance is measured. One design and construction technologies tower plumes, wildlife losses (e.g., birds commenter stated that the accuracy are necessary, and impingement and colliding with towers), fish losses due to needed would require stratified entrainment monitoring will provide loss of heated aquatic plumes to support sampling. over-wintering habitats, and increased Some commenters stated that the information needed for this determination. See 125.89(a)(2). impediments to waterway navigation costs presented in the NODA for post- due to icing in northern regions are operational monitoring were still too H. Cost considered local impacts that can be low. They stated that at a minimum 1. Consideration of Facility Level Costs addressed through the use of Track II or, multi-species assessments for in some cases, through design decisionmaking would cost EPA received comments on the modifications of the recirculating wet approximately $50,000. proposal regarding its facility level cost cooling tower. EPA has provided costs EPA believes that the post-operational estimates for the proposed requirements for plume abatement (2 percent of the monitoring cost is accurate. This cost and a number of the regulatory number of cooling towers) to address was developed to reflect the extent of alternatives. The issues addressed by cooling tower emissions and considers the monitoring required, which is commenters covered a range of topics, the other impacts to be negligible and noticeably less than previous 316(b) which EPA summarizes below. best addressed on a site-specific basis. monitoring requirements. It is likely that Some commenters claim that EPA has Some commenters criticize EPA’s the commenter is referring to these not considered or addressed all approach to estimating capital and previous monitoring requirements when environmental costs and impacts of the operating costs of recirculating wet making comments as to the cost of these regulatory alternatives. The commenters cooling towers. The commenters claim efforts. For example, previous studies state that EPA has not considered the that EPA has significantly may have required extensive operating efficiency losses of wet and underestimated the costs of a impingement and entrainment dry cooling tower systems. They claim recirculating wet cooling tower by monitoring and detailed taxonomic that both auxiliary power requirements considering only the cost of the cooling studies. The post operational and performance penalties may result in tower without the additional cost of monitoring required by this rule is reductions in capacity and in the other necessary cooling system
VerDate 11
equipment such as wiring, foundations, Chapter 2 of the Technical Development cooling purposes that is reused or noise attenuation treatment, the cost of Document for further discussion. recycled in subsequent industrial construction and other equipment. They In the NODA, EPA included further processes is equivalent to closed-cycle claim also that EPA’s estimates documentation to support its estimates recirculating cooling water for the understate makeup water costs for wet of the costs of dry cooling systems (both purposes of meeting the Track I cooling towers. The commenters add for capital and O&M components). capacity-reduction, requirements at that EPA’s cost multipliers for Despite the comments received § 125.84(b)(1). However, the amount of recirculating wet cooling towers are expressing concern over the cooling water that is not reused or questionable and not consistent with a methodology employed by EPA to recycled must be minimized. Therefore, number of engineering texts. With estimate the costs, EPA continues to the commenters’ concerns that costs respect to O&M costs, they question view its empirical models as robust, could be substantially higher, possibly EPA’s estimates for economies of scale. accurate, and well suited for the by several million dollars have been For dry cooling towers, the commenters purposes of the final rule. EPA addressed in the final rule. object to EPA’s methodology of making acknowledges that basing cost curves for Further, some commenters claim that a direct cost comparison between dry dry cooling systems on cooling flow is EPA has not considered the costs of a cooling systems and wet cooling unconventional. However, the model is sufficient number of regulatory systems. They claim that EPA’s based on empirical data and accurately alternatives or alternative technologies. approach for estimating capital and estimates the costs of dry cooling EPA included, in Section VIII of this O&M costs for dry cooling towers is systems. Regarding the subject of preamble and the Economic Analysis flawed because it relies on cooling water winterization, EPA’s costs inherently (Chapter 10), cost information on the flow as the cost basis. In addition, they include this technological aspect as it is range of regulatory alternatives state that EPA does not provide cost an incorporated design feature in considered for the final rule. equations or curves for dry cooling modern dry cooling systems upon One commenter on the NODA systems. One commenter claims that which the empirical models are described the costs associated with winterization costs of dry cooling correlated. See Chapter 4 of the potential delays in permit approvals. systems were not considered by EPA Technical Development Document for The commenter stated that should and that EPA therefore has further information regarding EPA’s permitting delays extend the underestimated the system’s costs. costing methodology for dry cooling. construction period, the associated costs One commenter questions EPA’s would accumulate at a monthly rate EPA fully documented the bases for estimates regarding the ‘‘design associated with the finance costs recirculating wet cooling tower cost approach value’’ used in plant cooling associated with down-payments on estimates in the NODA (66 FR 22866 systems. The commenter recommends equipment, the lost income from sales of and 22867). EPA disagrees with many of that EPA adopt an approach value of 8°F electricity, and the cost of purchasing the comments regarding flaws in instead of 10°F. The commenter claims replacement power. For regulatory estimating capital and operating costs that EPA has understated the size of the alternatives that have projected for cooling towers. The Technical cooling towers with its approach value permitting delay, EPA has incorporated Development Document and comment estimate. EPA provided significant the commenter’s suggestion to the response document discuss EPA’s documentation in the NODA regarding extent possible. For the final rule, EPA costing estimates and consideration of its estimates of cooling system design is basing the regulatory option on a two- the variety of issues asserted by approach values. Specifically, data track compliance option that, under the commenters, such as documentation of demonstrate that a 10 degree design ‘‘fast track,’’ has no associated delay in equipment costs, foundations, noise approach for a wet cooling tower is permitting. In addition, EPA has not attenuation, and the cost of acceptable industry practice. Chapter 3 accounted for cost savings of the rule construction. EPA has also considered of the Technical Development over the current, resource intensive, the comments regarding makeup water Document discusses this subject further case-by-case regulatory approach. In costs. The estimates of costs for this rule and presents EPA’s supporting data. that sense, the final rule overestimates reflect a realistic and accurate basis for Comments from manufacturers compliance costs. makeup water usage in wet cooling express concern over potential energy Another commenter to the NODA towers. These issues are discussed losses due to abandoning the use of provided a case-study example for further in Chapter 2 of the Technical waste heat for process water heating. converting the Indian Point Units 2 and Development Document. With respect to They expressed concern that the 3 to closed-cycle cooling water systems EPA’s estimates of O&M economies of proposed rule would discourage the or dry cooling systems. The results scale, EPA revised its estimates based practice of process and cooling water show a small cost impact for closed- on comments received and further reuse. The commenters assert that if cycle cooling water systems and a analysis. EPA conducted a thorough these potential energy loss costs were modest cost impact for dry cooling, review of its data and the public added to the other costs of the proposed according to the commenter. In terms of comments. Although the comments did rule, that the total cost could be the cost for producing power, the not persuasively describe errors in substantially higher, possibly by several incremental cost for the installation and EPA’s economies of scale estimates, million dollars. Thus, the commenters use of a closed-cycle cooling water they did prompt EPA to reconsider the state, the proposed rule could pose a system, according to the commenter’s concept. EPA’s further research revealed significant and perhaps insurmountable analysis is 0.01 to 0.03 cents per kWh. that there are economies of scale hurdle for construction of new The commenter’s analysis shows associated with certain components of manufacturing facilities. EPA incremental costs for the installation O&M, but that use of economies of scale considered these comments and is and use of a hybrid cooling system for total O&M costs would not be adopting a definition of cooling water between 0.14 and 0.19 cents per kWh appropriate. As such, EPA’s estimates for the final rule (see § 125.83) that and 0.21 to 0.27 cents per kWh for dry for operation and maintenance costs for addresses these concerns. At cooling. EPA evaluated the case-study wet cooling towers have been refined to § 125.86(b)(1)(ii), EPA also specifies that analysis presented by the commenter for reflect no economies of scale. See the amount of water withdrawn for this retrofit situation and finds the costs
VerDate 11
to be relatively applicable (as the technology options, which was not 4. Energy Supply costing analysis was based on EPA’s included in the economic analysis for Some industry respondents, including proposal cost estimates, EPA notes that the proposal, has been included in the the Utility Water Act Group, argued that some costing methodology revisions are final economic analysis. EPA the section 316(b) proposal would be a not reflected in the commenter’s considered the costs for a number of significant threat to the national energy analysis). EPA disagrees with several alternatives to the requirements in supply, would prohibit location of new cost-related estimates made in the today’s final rule. power plants in most places, and would commenter’s analysis, and therefore 3. Accuracy of the Estimates serve as a barrier to entry in the electric determines that the cost impacts of dry generation market. EPA disagrees with cooling technologies on the price of A number of commenters questioned these assertions based on the siting electricity is somewhat understated. See the accuracy of the cost estimates. One impact analysis discussed at Section response to comment document for commenter (Electric Power Supply V.B.2., the relatively low cost of the rule further discussion of this case-study Association) stated that EPA’s estimates as a proportion of revenues (as analysis and EPA’s technical review of of the cost of the rule are based on discussed in Section VIII), and the the study. several critical and arguable energy impact analysis described in 2. Need For More Complete Assessment assumptions: (1) The rate of new facility Section X.J. A number of industry respondents development in the coming years, (2) Some of the commenters stated or criticized the economic analysis the proportion of new facilities that implied that the cost of the rule would supporting the rule arguing that it has would employ cooling water intake have a significant impact on meeting underestimated the cost of the proposal. structures, (3) the costs of adopting one growth in energy demand. EPA Several comments noted that the technology versus another, and (4) the disagrees with this assertion because the technology cost, along with the baseline cost of scientific and engineering compliance cost of the final rule is an biological characterization, has been studies. The combined effect of these insignificant component of not only underestimated. A few comments assumptions, it is claimed, is that EPA new facility revenue but also the asserted that EPA has not considered underestimated the cost of the rule by construction cost of a new plant. Thus, additional alternatives in selecting the as much as one-hundred-fold. Another the cost of the rule is too small to affect preferred option to comply with commenter claimed that the cost of the the electric generation market. The cost requirements of the Executive Order rule would be more than five times of the final rule is so low primarily 12866. Industry commenters noted that higher than the EPA’s estimates. The because 93 percent of the projected new EPA has not selected the best Utility Water Act Group (UWAG) in-scope combined-cycle facilities, technology available on a cost-benefit estimated the cost of installing a cooling which are responsible for most of the basis. Commenters also noted that the tower alone at $6,366.7 million for new electric generation capacity, have environmental cost of the technologies recirculating wet cooling towers and already planned to install recirculating has not been reflected in the Economic $11,245.3 million for dry cooling, wet cooling towers in the baseline. Analysis. EPA recognizes that it selected assuming 100 percent of the combined- Therefore, they will incur, in addition to best technology available for cycle facilities would be required to permit application cost, only a cost minimizing adverse environmental install towers. associated with selecting and impact on the basis of what it implementing a design and construction EPA considers these estimates to be determined to be an economically technology such as a wedgewire screen unreasonable. After careful review of practicable cost for the industry as a or a fish return system on a traveling comments received and additional whole. EPA did this by considering the screen. In addition, estimates show that cost of the rule as compared with the analyses, EPA estimates the annualized most new in-scope coal facilities also revenue of a facility, as well as the cost compliance cost of the final rule to be plan to install cooling towers compared to the overall construction $47.7 million. This cost estimate independently of this rule. Thus, the costs for a new facility. This approach includes a revised forecast for new rule requirements will not have any is analogous to the economic electric generation capacity, a revised significant effect on the energy supply. achievability analyses it conducts for technology baseline for regulated Had EPA chosen dry cooling technology other technology-based rules under facilities, a revised estimate of the as the best technology available for sections 301 and 306 of the CWA which number of regulated manufacturing minimizing adverse environmental use very similar language to section facilities, and inclusion of costs for a impact, the energy impact would have 316(b) and to which section 316(b) comprehensive demonstration study in been significant (i.e., upwards of 0.51 refers, and is consistent with the Track II. The example costs presented percent reduction (1,904 MW) of the legislative history of section 316(b) of by UWAG were, as described by the projected new generating capacity). the CWA. At the same time, the record commenter, not directly comparable to Commenters asserted that the does contain analysis of the costs for a EPA’s cost estimates. The commenter requirements of the rule could adversely number of the regulatory alternatives included a significant equipment cost in affect the reliability of the electric considered under the rule. its analysis—that of the steam power system, potentially increasing the After reviewing these comments, EPA condenser—that clearly is not risk of brownouts or blackouts or a has revised the Economic Analysis. As applicable to the incremental costs of curtailment of load provided to a discussed in the NODA, EPA has this rule, as all new facilities would particular user. EPA disagrees with this gathered additional cost information to install a steam condenser regardless of assertion. While Track I requirements verify its cost estimates. It has collected this rule. In addition, several estimates (for facilities with intake flows equal to additional information on benefit or the for design variables differ from those or greater than10 MGD) to reduce efficacy of the technologies used in the used by EPA and significantly bias the capacity commensurate with the use of costing exercise. EPA has used more capital and operation and maintenance a closed-cycle, recirculating cooling recent forecasts to estimate the number costs upward. EPA analyzes and system and to select and install design of electric generation facilities. The discusses the UWAG example for costs and construction technologies would energy penalty associated with certain in the response to comment document. result in an additional use of electric
VerDate 11
power at a power plant not already equivalent to recirculation. Thus, a characteristics (including size and planning to use these technologies, the cogeneration facility can reuse cooling cooling system type) and costs of new magnitude of the electric use compared water as process water or vice versa and greenfield generators. Finally, EPA is with total electric supply at the national eliminate the need to install a using the Department of Energy’s (DOE) level is negligible (approximately 0.03 recirculating wet cooling tower to save updated Annual Energy Outlook 2001 as percent (100 MW) of projected new costs or reduce the size of any tower the basis for its total new capacity capacity). Only four coal-fired and five needed to meet the Track I intake forecast. The 2001 Outlook is based on combined-cycle plants are projected to capacity requirement. higher economic growth (in the install recirculating wet cooling towers reference case, 3.0 percent) and 5. Forecast for New Utility and because of the rule. Moreover, the electricity demand (in the reference Nonutility Electric Generators magnitude of electricity required in the case, 1.8 percent) compared to the operation of design and construction Most comments on the forecast of new Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (2.2 technologies, such as a fish return utility and nonutility electric generators percent and 1.4 percent, respectively). It system, is very small. Finally, future claimed that EPA underestimated the should be noted that, for both the facilities are not necessarily required to number of new generators in scope of proposed and the final section 316(b) install cooling towers; under Track II the proposed section 316(b) new facility new facility rule, EPA’s projection of they have an option to conduct site- rule. Commenters cited several reasons new electric generators is based on specific studies and seek to demonstrate for the alleged underestimate: (1) The forecasts made by the DOE’s Energy that other technologies will reduce use of an incomplete, outdated, or Information Administration (EIA), not impacts to fish and shellfish to a level biased database as the basis of the forecasts made by EPA. comparable to the level that would be estimate; (2) an underestimation of the 6. Forecast for New Manufacturers achieved at their site with the Track I number of facilities that will operate a requirements for intake capacity and CWIS; (3) an underestimation of the size EPA received few comments on the velocity. Thus, the efficiency issue of new facilities; and (4) the use of new number of new manufacturers estimated associated with the recirculating wet capacity forecasts that are based on for the proposed rule. One main concern cooling towers, raised in some conservative assumptions regarding was that the proposed regulations could comments, overemphasizes the effect on anticipated growth in demand for adversely impact offshore and coastal the power supply at the national level. electricity. Two commenters claimed oil and gas drilling operations. At Similarly, EPA does not believe that that the underestimation may be five- proposal, EPA had not considered or other requirements of the rule, such as fold. Commenters also suggested that projected impacts on this industrial the velocity limit and proportional flow EPA underestimated the intake flow of category. Among other concerns, these requirements, will adversely affect regulated (in scope) facilities and the commenters stated that: (1) offshore and efficiency at power plants. The Track I number of new generators that will use coastal oil and gas drilling facilities velocity requirements of the rule can be a once-through cooling system. One have much more limited technology met by design changes including commenter claimed that the proposed options for addressing any adverse enlarging the opening of the cooling section 316(b) new facility rule would environmental impact of cooling water water intake structure and screens cause additional delays in bringing new intake than land-based facilities; (2) without reducing the flow and hence electricity supply on line. under current regulations (40 CFR without influencing the cooling EPA used the most current and 435.11), existing mobile oil and gas efficiency. The proportional flow limits complete data available at the time to extraction facilities are considered new in the rule would also be largely met by develop the projected number of new sources when they operate on new power plants without any discernible electric generators. To address the above development wells and could be impact on their efficiency or net energy comments, EPA updated and expanded required to perform costly retrofits in supply. As discussed in section V.B.1.c. its research as new data have become order to comply with the 0.5 fps above, EPA found that most existing available. In support of the final section velocity requirement if they become facilities meet these requirements. The 316(b) new facility rule, EPA used the subject to the proposed requirements for proportional limitation can be met February 2001 version of the NEWGen cooling water intake structures at new during design by siting on an alternative database. Compared to the January 2000 facilities; and (3) higher cooling water waterbody or by choosing alternative NEWGen database used for proposal, intake velocities are necessary in marine technologies, for example. Additionally, the newer version contains more than waters to control biofouling of cooling see Section V.B.1. for a discussion of twice the number of new projects (941 water intake structures. proportional flow limits. compared to 466). EPA researched more EPA also received comments Commenters expressed concern that than three times as many greenfield suggesting that certain industry the regulatory requirements would combined-cycle facilities (320 compared segments should be exempted from the result in delays in the construction of to 94) and obtained cooling water source final section 316(b) new facility rule. the new power plants, thus affecting the information on almost four times the One commenter claimed that EPA power supply and electricity prices. number of facilities (199 compared to intended to exclude the wood products However, under Track I in the final rule, 56). While EPA recognizes the fast pace segment of the forest products industry facilities can build a power plant of changes in the electricity generation from the proposed section 316(b) new without any required pre-permit industry, EPA believes that the facility rule because the proposal monitoring. substantial increase in the number of analysis did not explicitly analyze this Some industry commenters asserted greenfield electric generators analyzed segment. This commenter suggested this that the requirements of the rule could will address concerns commenters had segment should be exempted because be a hindrance to cogeneration. EPA voiced. In addition, the much larger facilities generally use little water. disagrees with this conclusion. Contrary number of facilities identified as being Another commenter claimed that EPA to the assertion, Track I in the final rule in scope of the final section 316(b) new has overestimated the number of new provides incentives for cogeneration facility rule (57 compared to seven) will greenfield chemical facilities. This because it considers reuse of cooling provide a more robust and commenter stated that the actual water as process water and vice versa as representative basis for estimating the number of new chemical facilities is
VerDate 11
very low and that therefore, according to presented in Chapter 11 is inappropriate to harm or losses of organisms, because OMB guidelines, regulation of that for several reasons. First, as stated by many organisms survive impingement industry segment is not justified. EPA in its presentation of the data in and entrainment. While some organisms In response to these industry Chapter 11, the purpose of the data may survive impingement and comments, EPA will propose and take compilation was to provide information entrainment, the reliability of estimated final action on regulations for new on the relative magnitude of entrainment mortality rates has been offshore and coastal oil and gas impingement and entrainment, not to questioned because of various facilities, as defined at 40 CFR 435.10 evaluate potential secondary effects on measurement uncertainties and sources and 40 CFR 435.40, in the Phase III the affected populations. Thus, EPA did of potential bias. 91 Even if the results of section 316(b) rule. EPA is deferring not attempt to assemble the other types existing studies are accepted, the data regulation of these facilities due to the of data that the commenter noted would indicate that under normal operating unique engineering, cost, and economic be required to evaluate potential effects conditions entrainment mortality can be issues associated with offshore and of these losses on the populations of quite high for many species. Depending coastal drilling rigs, ships, and affected species. Such data include on temperature conditions within the platforms. EPA will not categorically survival rates of early life stages, growth intake and the life stage involved, exempt new facilities in those land- rates, reproductive rates, population studies of Hudson River species found based industry segments from the final size at the time of impingement and that entrainment mortality ranged from section 316(b) new facility rule for any entrainment, and potential carrying 93 to 100 percent for bay anchovy, 0 to of the reasons suggested by commenters. capacity of the population in the 64 percent for Atlantic tomcod, 57 to 92 EPA analyzed those industries that are surrounding waterbody. EPA notes that percent for herrings, 41 to 55 percent for most likely to experience adverse in most cases the studies that EPA white perch, and 18 to 55 percent for industry-level economic effects, based examined did not provide such data. striped bass. 92 A recent industry- on their large-volume cooling water use. EPA also notes that the data sponsored review of 36 entrainment Any facility that meets the in-scope uncertainties and potential biases survival studies found that anchovies requirements set forth in § 125.81 will associated with the impingement and and herrings have the highest have to comply with the rule, entrainment data presented in Chapter entrainment mortality, generally in irrespective of the number of in scope 11 of the Economic Analysis (discussed excess of 75 percent. 93 facilities in that segment, the industry’s by EPA in Section 11.2) should be taken The two commenters disagreed with general cooling water characteristics, or into account in any analysis of the data, EPA’s conclusion that the littoral zone whether the industry segment was including evaluation of potential is a more sensitive area. EPA is no explicitly analyzed in the proposal population-level effects. As EPA noted longer including consideration of the analysis. Should facilities in these other in Chapter 11, there is insufficient littoral zone in its final rule. See industrial categories face compliance information in many of the source discussion in Section VI.C. costs wholly disproportionate to those documents to determine how One commenter objected that EPA did EPA considered and found to be impingement and entrainment estimates not provide the original worksheets economically practicable in today’s may have been influenced by choices of used by EPA to compile the economic analysis, they can seek which species to study, differences in impingement and entrainment data alternative requirements in accordance collection and analytical methods provided in Chapter 11 of the EEA, with the provisions at § 125.85. among studies or across years, or arguing that this would have facilitated changes in a facility over time. EPA is an independent analysis by making it I. Benefits concerned that the consequences of easier to ‘‘quickly identify the studies 1. Cooling Water Intake Structure such data uncertainties and biases are used.’’ However, EPA notes that all data Impact Analysis Component of the even greater for population-level sources are provided in footnotes to the Benefits Analysis for the Proposed analyses than they are for an analysis of tables and full citations are provided in Section 316(b) New Sources Rule individuals. As EPA noted, the data are the references section at the end of Comments related to EPA’s cooling not a statistical sample; therefore, ‘‘the Chapter 11. The methods used to water intake structure impact analysis data should be viewed only as general compile and summarize these data are in Chapter 11 of the new sources EEA indicators of the potential range of were received from two industry impingement and entrainment losses.’’ 91 Boreman, J., L.W. Barnthouse, D.S. Vaughan, commenters. The comments focused on As one of the commenters C.P. Goodyear, S.W. Christensen, K.D. Kumar, B.L. Kirk, and W. Van Winkle. 1982. The Impact of four main topics: (1) Potential acknowledges, ‘‘EPA’s estimates were Entrainment and Impingement on Fish Populations population-level consequences of used primarily to understand the in the Hudson River Estuary: Volume I, impingement and entrainment, (2) relative proportion of different species Entrainment Impact Estimates for Six Fish potential compensatory responses of impinged and entrained.’’ Populations Inhabiting the Hudson River Estuary. Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory fish populations to mortality of early life Both commenters argued that analyses Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research stages, (3) potential impingement and involving long-term predictions of fish by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL/ entrainment survival, and (4) species populations must include estimates of NUREG/TM–385/VI. and habitats that may be particularly potential density-dependence 92 Boreman, J., L.W. Barnthouse, D.S. Vaughan, C.P. Goodyear, S.W. Christensen, K.D. Kumar, B.L. sensitive to cooling water intake (compensation). Again, EPA wishes to Kirk, and W. Van Winkle. 1982. the Impact of structure impacts. emphasize that the data presented in Entrainment and Impingement on Fish Populations Both commenters argued that EPA Chapter 11 were not intended for a in the Hudson River Estuary: Volume I, should have evaluated the impingement population-level analysis and are not Entrainment Impact Estimates for Six Fish Populations Inhabiting the Hudson River Estuary. and entrainment numbers presented in suitable for such an evaluation. Thus, Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Chapter 11 of the EEA in relation to the the argument that compensation must Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research total population of affected species, and be considered is irrelevant in the by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL/ one commenter commissioned a context of EPA’s EEA. NUREG/TM–385/VI. 93 fisheries scientist to conduct such an One of commenters argued that the Electric Power Research Institute. Review of Entrainment Survival Studies: 1970–2000. Prepared analysis. EPA believes that a annual impingement and entrainment by EA Engineering Science & Technology. population-level analysis of the data rates summarized by EPA do not equate December 2000.
VerDate 11
provided in Section 11.2 of the chapter, addition, several of the comments empirical estimates of benefits where along with a discussion of data addressed aspects of how a benefits data limitations or other critical uncertainties and potential biases. analysis should be performed. constraints preclude doing so in a Another technical issue raised by this Specifically, comments described (1) credible and reliable manner. commenter concerned the waterbody what the steps of benefits analysis need 3. Comments on the Relevance and classification of two of the facilities in to be (identify, quantify, and then value Estimation of Nonuse Values EPA’s impingement and entrainment benefits), (2) the use of best practices in tables. For the waterbody classifications, applying ‘‘benefits transfer’’ techniques Two comments were received that EPA relied on the industry’s 1995 for developing plausible monetary questioned the applicability of nonuse Utility Data Institute database because values to apply, and (3) the need to benefits to the section 316(b) results from EPA’s section 316(b) properly consider baseline conditions. rulemaking and critiqued EPA’s industry survey were not yet available. As clearly noted and acknowledged in discussion of how such nonuse values This database indicated ‘‘river’’ for the Chapter 11 of the EEA, ‘‘EPA was might be estimated based on existing waterbody type on which the intakes of unable to conduct a detailed, literature. Hudson River facilities are located. EPA quantitative analysis of the proposed These comments point out that the agrees with the commenter that this is rule because much of the information issue of nonuse values (also known in misleading, since the portion of the needed to quantify and value potential some literature as ‘‘passive use’’ values) Hudson River where the intakes are reductions in impingement and has sometimes been controversial, located is a tidal river. For analysis entrainment at new facilities was which the Agency recognizes. Further, supporting today’s final rule, facility unavailable’’ (EEA, p. 11–1). The the comments accurately note that there categorization for all facilities is based chapter then proceeds to detail the types are limited methods available for on the plant’s response to the question of information that would be required to measuring nonuse values, and that the on waterbody type in the Agency’s do the analysis for new sources (the accuracy of these methods can be section 316(b) industry survey chapter also offers some examples using debated because there are no observable administered for the existing facility available data to illustrate potential market transactions or other ways to rule. EPA has revised its data tables to benefits based on site-specific studies of infer values by using the revealed place data from studies on Hudson some existing facilities.) preferences of the American people. River facilities under the ‘‘estuary and The comments received are accurate EPA recognizes that challenges tidal river’’ classification. Similarly, in the sense that they point out what the associated with the estimation of EPA agrees with the commenter that Agency acknowledges at the outset, nonuse values have been widely although the intake of the Monroe plant namely, that a quantitative benefits discussed in the economics literature as is on the Raisin River, the facility is analysis was not feasible for the well as in the context of regulatory more appropriately classified as a Great proposed rule for new facilities. The analysis and damage case litigation. Lakes facility because of the fish species comments received, however, do not However, consistent with the broadly involved. EPA has therefore revised its offer data or methods that would enable accepted view in the economics tables so that impingement and the Agency to overcome these profession, the Agency believes that entrainment data for this facility are constraints. In fact, a main thrust of nonuse values are likely to exist and now included with data for the Great industry’s comments has been that the apply for many (if not all) of the Lakes. However, as noted above, the Agency is required to do a site-specific beneficial ecological outcomes that stem final rule does not distinguish among benefits analysis, given the site-specific from EPA regulatory actions, including waterbody types, so such classifications nature of a benefits analysis. enhancements to aquatic systems as can do not have a direct effect on the final Because the gaps still exist in the be anticipated from the proposed regulations. types of information required to conduct section 316(b) rulemaking. There is no a more comprehensive benefits analysis, convincing evidence to suggest that 2. Responses to Comments on the the Agency has been unable to nonuse values strictly apply to only a Economic Valuation Components of the appreciably expand upon the economic small set of environmental resources or Benefits Analysis for the Proposed portions of its benefits analysis for only to irreversible changes in the Section 316(b) New Sources Rule today’s final rule. However, EPA is condition of those resources. Further, The comments on the new sources developing a more comprehensive even if nonuse values were thought to benefits analysis (economic component) assessment of benefits for its upcoming apply only under limited circumstances, were all fairly generic in their rulemaking for existing facilities, the proposed section 316(b) rule is statements and fairly consistent in their because some of the key data limitations likely to have beneficial impacts on arguments. The main thrust throughout can be more readily overcome when species and resources of concern (e.g., most of the relevant comments was to baseline conditions for the facilities and threatened or endangered fish species) point out that the Agency had not the impacted aquatic ecosystems can be and thereby meet even a narrowly developed a quantitative benefits identified and studied (these defined applicability test. analysis and, as such, it had failed to perspectives are not available for new EPA agrees with the comments in conform to its own guidance and the sources with unknown locations). terms of recognizing that there are no requirements of Executive Order 12866. Finally, EPA notes that the Agency’s clear preference methods available for Some comments noted that the benefits Guidelines for Preparing Economic estimating nonuse values. Nonetheless, analysis did not generate relevant Analysis are, as the title states, there are a number of stated preference quantitative information that could be ‘‘guidelines’’ and not strict methods that can be and have been used to facilitate an informative requirements. Consistent with these successfully applied to develop credible comparison of benefits and costs, and guidelines and standard professional estimates of nonuse values. Research several comments encouraged EPA to best practices, it is the Agency’s intent using some of the early applications of complete its benefits analysis. Industry to develop economic analyses that are as the contingent valuation method (CVM, comments have also repeatedly pointed complete and reliable as is feasible for which is one type of stated preference out that the Agency should perform a its rulemakings. However, it is neither method that has been applied by site-specific benefits analysis. In required nor prudent for EPA to develop economists for nonuse value estimation)
VerDate 11
indicated that nonuse estimates derived product demand would be met from the actually placing operational restrictions from inadequately designed CVM new facilities. However, data were not on the cooling system which in their survey instruments may not be wholly readily available to verify this view, are not part of a CWIS. Further, reliable. Nonetheless, the body of assumption. As a sensitivity analysis, they argue that Congress did not give research on stated preferences that has EPA also calculated costs by assuming EPA authority to decide how much evolved over the past several years that 37.5 percent of the growth in new water a facility should withdraw, and provides a broadening array of tools and capacity in the chemicals sectors would thus, EPA may not regulate the gallons methodological refinements that occur at new facilities. In addition, for per day withdrawn, but must be limited overcome many of the limitations manufacturing facilities, EPA used the to regulating physical and behavioral inherent in some of the earlier growth rates projected for three to five barriers located at the interface between applications of contingent valuation years to forecast growth over the 20-year the intake structure and the water body methods. EPA believes that well- time period. and separation and removal processes designed, fully tested, and properly In estimating costs, EPA assumed that located between the point of withdrawal implemented stated preference new manufacturing facilities that would and the cooling water pumps. By these approaches can provide useful and become operational over the 20-year definitions, supply pumps and all other credible measures of nonuse values. period would be uniformly distributed elements of the cooling water system are EPA would like to engage in a large- over time. Actual growth could differ not intake structure technologies. Thus, scale primary research effort to develop from this predicted pattern. The commenters asserted EPA has no legal and apply state-of-the-art stated economic analysis is based on five authority to require wet cooling or dry preference methods to the issue of major industry groups that account for cooling. estimating nonuse values for the the vast majority of cooling water In response, EPA emphasizes that it is ecological outcomes anticipated from withdrawal in the U.S. Some facilities not requiring wet cooling, but that it is section 316(b) regulatory options. in other industries may withdraw establishing performance-based However, the Agency lacks the cooling water in excess of 2 MGD and technology requirements on the budgetary resources, time, and may incur some costs to comply with dynamic flow of the cooling water appropriate authorities to pursue such the requirements of the rule. Such costs intake structure that reduce research. Accordingly, the EEA are not reflected in the economic impingement and entrainment at a level discusses the viable alternative analysis because of lack of reliable and that is achieved by using closed-cycle approach. Chapter 11 presents two types readily available data. To the extent that cooling. Section 316(b) authorizes EPA of benefits transfer approaches that the facilities in other industries are affected, to impose limitations on the location, Agency has relied upon in past EPA believes that the costs and design, construction and capacity of regulatory analyses and describes the economic impacts would be similar to CWISs. EPA interprets the statute to findings of studies used in these those considered by EPA and found to authorize it to regulate that volume of exercises. While no estimates of nonuse be economically practicable. the flow of water withdrawn through a benefits are made in the EEA, the Numerous commenters argued that cooling water intake structure as a discussion provided by the Agency the cost estimates in the economic means of addressing ‘‘capacity.’’ In re establishes the appropriate concepts, analysis are inaccurate, resulting in the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, approaches, and caveats that would be underestimation of the total cost of the Decision of the General Counsel No. 41 associated with the benefits transfer rule. Commenters disagreed with the (June 1, 1976). Such limitations on the approach that would need to be used if cost analysis for many aspects of the volume of flow are consistent with the the Agency were to develop such rule, including but not limited to dictionary definition of ‘‘capacity’’ 94, estimates. monitoring, operations and the legislative history of the Clean Water J. Engineering and Economic Analysis maintenance, contingency costs, and Act 95, and the 1976 regulations. 96 Id. Limitations capital costs. Indeed, as Decision of the General To the extent possible, EPA used Counsel No. 41 points out, the major Some commenters argued that the information on the specific environmental impacts of cooling water industry profiles presented in the characteristics of planned new plants intake structures are those affecting proposed rule were inaccurate. One for which information is available to aquatic organisms living in the volumes commenter noted that, in particular, the project the baseline characteristics of of water withdrawn through the intake pulp and paper industry has changed facilities affected by the rule. structure. Therefore, regulation of the substantially since the early 1990’s, the Some commenters questioned the volume of the flow of water withdrawn time period upon which EPA industry applicability and appropriateness of the also advances the objectives of section profile assumptions are based. economic analysis in relation to new 316(b). EPA’s economic analysis is based on (greenfield) facilities and existing Commenters also stated that EPA’s the forecasts for new facilities. To the facilities. proposed proportional flow withdrawal extent that forecasts are uncertain, the The estimates do not cover substantial requirements lack a legal foundation estimates for costs are uncertain. The modification of existing facilities. These since the references to location and economic analysis is based on the 20- facilities are not covered by the rule; capacity in section 316(b) refer to the year forecast, while the life of the hence, estimates for these facilities are CWIS itself, not the whole cooling facility is assumed to be 30 years for not reflected in this analysis. system, and Congress did not authorize annualizing costs. Facility life spans K. EPA Authority could differ from the 30-year life span, 94 ‘‘Cubic contents; volume; that which can be and as a result the annualized cost to Numerous commenters raised issues contained.’’ Random House Dictionary of the these facilities could also differ. To with regard to EPA’s authority to English Language, cited in Decision of the General estimate the number of new facilities for implement section 316(b) in the Counsel No. 41. the chemical sector, EPA assumed, on proposed new facility rule. Commenters 95 Legislative History of the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, 93d Cong., 1st the basis of comments that the estimate asserted that EPA’s authority is limited Sess., at 196–7 (1973). of 50 percent used at proposal was too to regulating CWISs and that by 96 40 CFR 402.11(c) (definition of ‘‘capacity’’), 41 high, that 25 percent of growth in regulating dynamic flow, EPA is FR 17390 (April 26, 1976).
VerDate 11
EPA to limit the siting of new facilities Congress includes particular language in location, design, construction, or that use cooling water. To the extent one section of a statute, but omits it in capacity of a cooling water intake that new facilities comply with this another section of the same act, it is structure. requirement by employing a wet cooling generally presumed that Congress acted Other commenters strongly opposed system or by obtaining water from other intentionally and purposely in the restoration measures as substitute for sources, EPA believes that this is within disparate inclusion or exclusion. Bates direct controls, arguing that they are not EPA’s authority to regulate capacity, as v. U.S., 522 U.S. 23 (1997). See also the ‘‘best technology available for stated above. Because the major Florida Public Telecommunications minimizing adverse environmental environmental impacts of cooling water Ass’n, Inc. v. F.C.C., 54 F.3d 857 (D.C. impact,’’ but the commenters thought intake structures are those affecting Cir. 1995). Further, section 316(a) and restoration measures may have a role in aquatic organisms living in the volumes section 316(b) address two different compensating for past harms to the of water withdrawn through the intake issues. Section 316(a) addresses the aquatic environment or as an additional structure, in the limited circumstances discharge of heated water while section consideration above the protections where the volume of water withdrawn 316(b) address the withdrawal of huge offered by direct controls. Another would exceed the proportional flow volumes of water. Thus, it is reasonable commenter added that restoration requirements and the facility would to view the two different sections of the measures, in the context of section need to locate elsewhere to meet the statute as addressing different 316(b), are generally unworkable and requirement, EPA believes this environmental problems in different that the only measurable restoration regulation of location also advances the ways. In re Brunswick Steam Electric method would be offsetting, in which an objectives of section 316(b). Plant, Decision of the General Counsel applicant would stop use of an older intake facility that does more harm than Some commenters argued that section No. 41 (June 1, 1976). For purposes of implementing section 316(b) in the new the proposed one. 316(b) is no more stringent than section Some commenters also stated that 316(a) and thus section 316(b) compels facility rule, EPA thinks it is reasonable to interpret the phrase adverse restoration should be included in EPA to interpret ‘‘adverse permitting considerations when it is environmental impact’’ as an impact environmental impacts as including a range of impacts, including determined that dry cooling is not with a demonstrated impact on a impingement and entrainment, feasible. In this case, the facility should ‘‘balanced indigenous population.’’ EPA diminishment of compensatory reserve, use a wet closed-cycle recirculating does not agree that the CWA compels stresses to the population or ecosystem, system and restoration should be EPA to interpret ‘‘adverse harm to threatened or endangered considered. These commenters also environmental impact’’ as that term is species, impairment of state water suggested that, if restoration is allowed, used in section 316(b) in the Act by quality standards, see Section V, above. there should be consultation with other reference to the phrase ‘‘balanced Some commenters stated that section State and Federal resource agencies to indigenous population’’ under section 316(b), which focuses on intakes, not avoid inconsistent approaches. Finally, 316(a). The CWA is silent with respect discharges, does not authorize EPA to commenters stated that section 316(b) to what is meant by ‘‘adverse establish a rule authorizing States to set does not authorize mandatory environmental impact’’ under section additional cooling water intake restoration. 316(b), whereas the CWA specifically structure requirements to meet state Today’s final rule for new facilities mentions ‘‘balanced indigenous water quality standards. EPA addresses includes restoration measures as part of population’’ as a variance under section this issue in Section V.B. above. Track II. EPA is not including 316(a). The main guiding principles for restoration in Track I because this track statutory interpretations were L. Restoration is intended to be expeditious and articulated in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. In the proposed rule EPA requested provide certainty for the regulated Natural Resources Defense Council, comments on a variety of mandatory, community and a streamlined review Inc., 467 U.S. 838, 843 (1984). There the discretionary, and voluntary regulatory process for the permitting authority. To court stated, if the statute is silent or approaches involving restoration do this for new facilities, EPA has ambiguous with respect to the specific measures (65 FR 49089). Many defined the best technology available for issue, the question for the court is commenters supported a role for minimizing adverse environmental whether the agency’s answer is based on restoration or mitigation. These impact in terms of reduction of a permissible construction of the statute. commenters stated that restoration is a impingement and entrainment, an The court need not conclude that the well-accepted concept that should have objective measure of environmental agency construction was the only one it a voluntary role in section 316(b) performance. By contrast, restoration permissibly could have adopted to determinations and constitutes an measures in general require complex uphold the construction, or even the appropriate means for sources to reduce and lengthy planning, implementation, reading the court would have reached if the potential for causing adverse and evaluation of the effects of the the question initially had arisen in a environmental impact to below the level measures on the populations of aquatic judicial proceeding. Thus, if a statute is of regulatory concern, or reduced organisms or the ecosystem as a whole. ambiguous and an agency’s regulatory concern. Commenters further EPA is including restoration measures interpretation of the statute is stated that restoration should not be in Track II to the extent that the Director reasonable, a court must defer to the mandatory and that EPA lacks authority determines that the measures taken will agency. Here, EPA’s interpretation of the to require it but should not preclude maintain the fish and shellfish in the statute is reasonable and furthers the restoration measures from playing an waterbody in a manner that represents purposes of the CWA. This important role in section 316(b) performance comparable to that interpretation is further supported permitting decisions. These same achieved in Track I. Applicants in Track because Congress used different terms commenters stated that restoration II need not undertake restoration in section 316(b) than it used in section should not be considered the best measures, but they may choose to 316(a). Congress did not refer to a technology available for minimizing undertake such measures. Thus, to the ‘‘balanced indigenous population’’ in adverse environmental impact because extent that such measures achieve section 316(b) of the CWA. Where it is not a technology that addresses the performance comparable to that
VerDate 11
achieved in Track I, it is within EPA’s waterbody will result in performance reporting requirements for new authority to authorize the use of such comparable to that achieved in Track I. facilities. The regulations also require measures in the place of the Track I The additional measures may include the Director to review application requirements. This is similar to the such things as reclamation of materials submitted by each new facility compliance alternative approach EPA abandoned mine lands to eliminate or and include the requirements and took in the effluent guidelines program reduce acid mine drainage along a monitoring and recordkeeping for Pesticide Chemicals: Formulating, stretch of the waterbody, establishment requirements in the permit. Packaging and Repackaging. There EPA of riparian buffers or other barriers to EPA will develop a model permit and established a numeric limitation but reduce runoff of solids and nutrients permitting guidance to assist Directors also a set of best management practices from agricultural or silvicultural lands, in implementing these requirements. In that would accomplish the same removal of barriers to fish migration, or addition, the Agency will develop numeric limitations. See 61 FR 57518, creation of new habitats to serve as implementation guidance for owners 57521 (Nov. 6, 1997). EPA believes that spawning or nursery areas. Another and operators that will address how to section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act example might be a facility that chooses comply with the application provides EPA with sufficient authority to demonstrate that flow reductions and requirements, the sampling and to authorize the use of voluntary less protective velocity controls, in monitoring requirements, technology restoration measures in lieu of the concert with a fish hatchery to restock plans, and the recordkeeping and specific requirements of Track I where fish being impinged and entrained with reporting requirements in these the performance is substantially similar fish that perform a similar function in regulations. under the principles of Chevron USA v. the community structure, will result in A. When Does the Rule Become NRDC, 467 U.S. 837, 844–45 (1984). performance comparable to that Effective? Here, Congress is silent concerning the achieved in Track I. role of restoration technologies in the EPA recognizes that it may not always This rule becomes effective thirty (30) statute and in the legislative history, be possible to establish quantitatively days from the date of publication. After either by explicitly authorizing or that the reduction in impact on fish and the effective date of the regulation, new explicitly precluding their use. EPA also shellfish is comparable using the types facilities are required to submit the believes that appropriate restoration of measures discussed above as would application data for cooling water intake measures or conservation measures that be achieved in Track I, due to data and structures required under these are undertaken on a voluntary basis by modeling limitations. Despite such regulations. a new facility to meet the requirements limitations, EPA believes that there are B. What Information Must I Submit to of the rule fall within EPA’s authority to situations where a qualitative the Director When I Apply for My New regulate the ‘‘design’’ of cooling water demonstration of comparable or Reissued NPDES Permit? intake structures. Bailey v. U.S., 516 performance can reasonably assure U.S. 137 (1995)(In determining meaning substantially similar performance. EPA The NPDES application process under of words used in a statute, court is thus providing, in § 125.86, that the 40 CFR 122.21 requires that facilities considers not only the bare meaning of Track II Comprehensive Demonstration submit information and data 180 days the word, but also its placement and Study should show that either: (1) The prior to the commencement of a purpose in the statutory scheme.) Track II technologies would result in discharge. If you are the owner or This interpretation of the statute fits reduction in both impingement operator of a facility that meets the new well within the purpose of section mortality and entrainment of all life facility definition, you will be required 316(b) of the CWA. The purpose of stages of fish and shellfish of 90 percent to submit the information that is section 316(b) is to minimize adverse or greater of the reduction that would be required under 40 CFR 122.21 and environmental impact from cooling achieved through Track I (quantitative § 125.86 of today’s final rule with your water intake structures. Restoration demonstration) or, (2) if consideration of initial permit application and with measures that result in the performance impacts other than impingement subsequent applications for permit comparable to that achieved in Track I mortality and entrainment is included, reissuance. The Director will review the further this objective while offering a the Track II technologies will maintain information you provide and will significant degree of flexibility to both fish and shellfish in the waterbody at a confirm whether your facility is a new permitting authorities and facilities. substantially similar level to that which facility and establish the appropriate EPA recognizes that restoration would be achieved under Track I requirements to be applied to the measures have been used at existing (quantitative or qualitative cooling water intake structure(s). facilities implementing section 316(b) demonstration). At 40 CFR 122.21, today’s rule on a case-by-case, best professional EPA does not intend the foregoing requires all owners or operators of new judgment basis as an innovative tool or discussion or today’s rule to be facilities to submit three general as a tool to conserve fish or aquatic authoritative with respect to any categories of information when they organisms, compensate for the fish or ongoing permit proceedings for existing apply for an NPDES permit. The general aquatic organisms killed, or enhance the facilities or previously issued existing categories of information include (1) aquatic habitat harmed or destroyed by facility permits, which should continue physical data to characterize the source the operation of cooling water intake to be governed by existing legal water body in the vicinity where the structures. Under Track II, this authorities. EPA will address the issue cooling water intake structures are flexibility will be available to new of restoration further in Phase II and located, (2) data to characterize the facilities to the extent that they can Phase III. design and operation of the cooling demonstrate performance comparable to water intake structures, and (3) existing that achieved in Track I. For example, VII. Implementation data (if they are available) to if a new facility that chooses Track II is Under the final rule, section 316(b) characterize the baseline biological on an impaired waterbody, that facility requirements would be implemented condition of the source waterbody. All may choose to demonstrate that velocity through the NPDES permit program. applicants must also submit a statement controls in concert with measures to These regulations establish application, specifying whether they will comply improve the productivity of the monitoring, recordkeeping, and with either Track I or Track II
VerDate 11
(§ 125.86(a)(1)), and source waterbody b. Cooling Water Intake Structure Data available, a list of species (or relevant flow information (§§ 125.86(b)(3) or All new facilities must submit the taxa) in the vicinity of the cooling water 125.86(c)(1)). If you are a Track I cooling water intake structure data intake structure, and identification of applicant, you must also submit (1) data required at 40 CFR 122.21(r)(3) to the species and life stages that would be to show you will meet the Track I flow characterize the cooling water intake most susceptible to impingement and and velocity requirements and (2) a structure and evaluate the potential for entrainment (including both nekton and design and construction technology impingement and entrainment of meroplankton) (Species identified plan demonstrating that you have aquatic organisms. Information on the should include the range of species in selected design and construction design of the intake structure and its the system including the forage base); (3) if available, identification and technologies necessary to minimize location in the water column will allow evaluation of the primary period of impingement mortality and/or the permit writer to evaluate which reproduction, larval recruitment, and species or life stages would potentially entrainment if you are located where period of peak meroplankton abundance be subject to impingement and such technologies are necessary. If you for relevant taxa; (4) if available, entrainment. A diagram of the facility’s are a Track II applicant, you must also information sufficient to provide data water balance would be used to identify submit a comprehensive demonstration representative of the seasonal and daily the proportion of intake water used for study with detailed information on biological activity in the vicinity of the cooling, make-up, and process water. source waterbody and intake structure cooling water intake structure; (5) if The water balance diagram also characteristics, and a verification available, identification of all threatened provides a picture of the total flow in monitoring plan. Applicants seeking an or endangered species that might be alternative requirement under § 125.85 and out of the facility, allowing the susceptible to impingement and permit writer to evaluate compliance must submit data that demonstrate that entrainment at your cooling water with the Track I flow reduction their compliance costs would be wholly intake structures; (6) documentation of requirements (if applicable). Specific out of proportion to the costs considered any public participation or consultation data on the intake structure include (1) with Federal or State agencies by EPA in establishing the requirements a narrative description of the of §§ 125.84(a) through (e) or that undertaken in collecting the data; (7) if configuration of each of your cooling the above data are supplemented with compliance with the rule would cause water intake structures and where it is significant adverse impacts on local air data collected in actual field studies, a located in the waterbody and in the description of all methods and quality quality, local water resources or local water column; (2) latitude and longitude energy markets. assurance procedures for data in degrees, minutes, and seconds for collection, sampling, and analysis, The following describes the each of your cooling water intake including a description of the study application requirements for all new structures; (3) a narrative description of area; identification of the biological facilities and the requirements specific the operation of each of your cooling assemblages to be sampled or evaluated to Tracks I and II in more detail. water intake structures, including (both nekton and meroplankton); and design intake flows, daily hours of data collection, sampling, and analysis 1. All New Facilities operation, number of days of the year in methods. The sampling or data analysis a. Source Water Physical Data operation, and seasonal changes, if methods used must be appropriate for a applicable; (4) a flow distribution and quantitative survey and based on a All new facilities must provide the water balance diagram that includes all consideration of methods used in other source water physical data required at sources of water to the facility, biological studies performed within the 40 CFR 122.21(r)(2) in their permit recirculating flows, and discharges; (5) same source waterbody. The study area applications. These data are needed to engineering drawings of the cooling should include, at a minimum, the area characterize the facility and evaluate the water intake structure. of influence of the cooling water intake type of waterbody and species affected c. Source Water Baseline Biological structure. by the cooling water intake structure. Characterization Data d. Source Water Flow Data This information will also be used by the permit writer to evaluate the All new facilities must submit the All facilities must demonstrate appropriateness of the design and source water baseline biological compliance with the source water flow characterization data required in 40 CFR construction technologies selected by requirements in §§ 125.84(b)(3) and 122.21(r)(4) with their permit the applicant for use at their site in (c)(2). Information to show that a new application. This information will subsequent permit proceedings. Specific facility is in compliance with these characterize the biological community data items that must be submitted requirements must be submitted to the in the vicinity of the cooling water Director in accordance with include (1) a narrative description and intake structure as well as the operation §§ 125.86(b)(3) and (c)(1). scale drawings showing the physical of the cooling water intake structures. If your facility is located on a configuration of all source waterbodies The Director may use this information freshwater river or stream, you must used by the facility, including areal in subsequent permit renewal submit data that supports that you are dimensions, depths, salinity and proceedings to determine if the withdrawing less than five (5) percent of temperature regimes, and other applicant’s design and construction the annual mean flow. The documentation; (2) an identification and technology plan should be revised. This documentation might include either characterization of the source supporting information must include publicly available flow data from a waterbody’s hydrological and existing data (if available), which may nearby U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) geomorphological features, as well as be supplemented with new field studies gauging station or actual instream flow the methods used to conduct any if the applicant so chooses. The monitoring data that the facility has physical studies to determine the applicant must submit the following collected itself. The waterbody flow intake’s zone of influence and the specific data (1) a list of the data that are should be compared with the total results of such studies; and (3) not available and efforts made to design flow of all cooling water intake locational maps. identify sources of the data; (2) if structures at the new facility.
VerDate 11
If your cooling water intake structure printed and distributed by private can be imported into a computer-aided is withdrawing water from an estuary or companies (available at bookstores or design (CAD) program or geographic a tidal river, you need to calculate the marine supply stores). The midrange information system (GIS). If these tools tidal excursion and provide the flow method involves computing the tidal are unavailable, 1:100,000 scale data for your facility and the supporting excursion distance using the Tidal topographic maps (USGS) can be used. calculations. The tidal excursion Prism Method. 97 The complex method (2) Obtain maximum flood and ebb distance can be computed using three involves the use of a two-dimensional or velocities (in meters per second) for the different methods ranging from simple three-dimensional hydrodynamic waterbody in the area of the cooling to complex. The simple method model. The simplest method to use is water intake structure from NOAA Tidal involves using available tidal velocities the following: Current Tables. that can be obtained from the Tidal (1) Locate the facility on either a (3) Calculate average flood and ebb Current Tables formerly published by NOAA nautical chart or a base map velocities (in meters per second) over the National Ocean Service of the created from the USGS 1:100,000 scale the entire flood or ebb cycle by using National Oceanic and Atmospheric Digital Line Graph (DLG) data available the maximum flow and ebb velocities Administration (NOAA) and currently on the USGS website. These DLG Data from 2 above.
=∗2 VelocityAverage Flood Velocity Maximum Flood π (Equation 1)
=∗2 VelocityAverage Ebb Velocity Maximum Ebb π (Equation 2)
(4) Calculate the flood and ebb tidal excursion distance using the average flood and ebb velocities from 3 above.
∗∗s DistanceFlood Tidal Excursion = Velocity Average Flood 6. 2103 3600 hr (Equation 3)
∗∗s DistanceEbb Tidal Excursion = Velocity Average Ebb 6. 2103 3600 hr (Equation 4)
(5) Using the total of the flood and ebb Depths can easily be obtained from to a certain extent by the withdrawal of distances from above, define the bathymetric or nautical charts available cooler water and the discharge of heated diameter of a circle that is centered over from NOAA. In many areas, depths are water into the system. This information the opening of the cooling water intake available in digital form. demonstrates to the permit writer that structure. (8) Calculate a volume by multiplying you are maintaining the thermal (6) Define the area of the waterbody the area of the waterbody defined in 6 stratification or turnover pattern (where that falls within the area of the circle by the average depth from 7. present) of the source water except in (see Appendix 2 to Preamble). The area Alternatively, the actual volume can be cases where the disruption is of the waterbody, if smaller than the calculated directly with a GIS system determined to be beneficial to the total area of the circle might be using digital bathymetric data for the management of fisheries for fish and determined either by using a planimeter defined area. shellfish by any fishery management or by digitizing the area of the If your cooling water is withdrawn agency(ies) such that it maintains waterbody using a CAD program or GIS. from a lake or reservoir, you must appropriate habitat for the biological For cooling water intake structures submit information such as a narrative makeup of the waterbody. located offshore in large waterbodies, description of the waterbody thermal 2. Track I Facilities the area of the waterbody might equal stratification and any supporting the entire area of the circle (see D in documentation and engineering a. Flow Reduction Information Appendix 3 to Preamble). For cooling calculations to show that your cooling New facilities larger than 10 MGD that water intake structures located flush water intake structure meets the choose Track I must submit the data on with the shoreline, the area might be requirement not to alter the natural flow reduction required in § 125.86(b)(1) essentially a semicircle (see C in thermal stratification or turnover pattern with their permit applications. New Appendix 3 to Preamble). For cooling (where present) of the source water facilities between 2 and 10 MGD that water intake structures located in the except in cases where the disruption is choose to comply with the Track I upper reaches of a tidal river, the area determined to be beneficial to the requirements at § 125.84(b) must also might be some smaller portion of the management of fisheries for fish and submit this data. The information area of the circle (see A in Appendix 3 shellfish by any fishery management required includes a narrative to Preamble). agency(ies). Typically, this natural description of the water balance of the (7) Calculate the average depth of the thermal stratification will be defined by closed-cycle recirculating cooling water waterbody area defined in 6 above. the thermocline, which may be affected system for the facility and an
97 Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Diana, E., A.Y. Kuo, B.J. Neilson, C.F., Cerco, Point, VA. and P.V. Hyer. 1987. Tidal prism model manual,
VerDate 11
engineering demonstration that the impingement mortality and any historical studies characterizing the intake flows have been minimized to the entrainment. physical and biological conditions in maximum extent reasonably possible. the vicinity of the proposed or actual 3. Track II Facilities You should also consider all feasible intakes and their relevancy to the methods to re-use blowdown in other a. Comprehensive Demonstration Study proposed study; (3) a summary of any plant operations. New facilities between If you select Track II, § 125.86(c)(2) public participation or consultation 2 and 10 MGD that choose to comply requires you to perform and submit to with Federal or State agencies with the Track I requirements at the Director the results of a undertaken in development of the plan; § 125.84(c) must submit data that shows Comprehensive Demonstration Study, and (4) a sampling plan for data that that the facility’s total design water including data and detailed analyses to will be collected in actual field studies intake flow is less than 10 MGD. See demonstrate that you will reduce the in the source waterbody that documents § 122.21(r)(3)(iii). impacts to fish and shellfish to levels all methods and quality assurance procedures for data collection, b. Velocity Information comparable to the level you would sampling, and analysis. The study area New facilities that choose Track I achieve were you to implement the Track I requirements at § 125.84(b)(1), for such field studies must include, at must submit the data on velocity a minimum, the area of influence of the required in § 125.86(b)(2) with their and (2). To meet the ‘‘comparable level’’ requirement, you must demonstrate that cooling water intake structure and at permit applications. The information least 100 meters beyond. The area of required includes a narrative you have reduced both impingement mortality and entrainment of all life influence is the portion of water subject description of the design, structure, to the forces of the intake structure such stages of fish and shellfish to 90 percent equipment, and operation used to meet that a particle within the area is likely or greater of the reduction that would be the performance requirement and any to be pulled into the intake structure. engineering calculations used to achieved through Track I, or if your You must submit the results of a calculate design through-screen demonstration includes consideration of Source Water Biological Study in velocity. impacts other than impingement accordance with § 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A). mortality and entrainment, that the This characterization must include (1) a c. Design and Construction Technology measures taken will maintain the fish Plan taxonomic identification and and shellfish in the waterbody at a characterization of aquatic biological If you select Track I, § 125.86(b)(4) substantially similar level to that which resources (nekton and meroplankton) to and (b)(5) require you to include a would be achieved through Track I. provide a summary of historic and Construction Technology Plan in your Your proposed technologies may contemporary aquatic biological application that demonstrates that your specifically include the reuse of spent resources; a determination and facility has selected and will implement cooling water as industrial process description of the target populations of the design and construction water and the associated reductions in concern (those species and life stages technologies necessary to minimize process water withdrawals from the that would be most susceptible to impingement mortality and/or source waterbody as a means for impingement and entrainment); and a entrainment when certain conditions reducing intake capacity and description of the abundance and exist at the site. If you select Track I and impingement and entrainment. temporal and spatial characterization of choose to comply with the requirements The Comprehensive Demonstration the target populations based on the of § 125.84(c) (which are available to Study has four parts: • collection of multiple years of data to facilities between two and ten MGD) A proposal for how information capture the seasonal and daily you much install technologies to reduce will be collected; biological activity in the vicinity of the impingement at some locations and you • A Source Water Biological Study; • cooling water intake structure; (2) an must install technologies to reduce An evaluation of potential cooling identification of all threatened or entrainment at all sites. See water intake structure effects; and • endangered species that might be § 125.84(c)(3) and (4). Examples of such A Verification Monitoring Plan. susceptible to impingement and technologies that may be appropriate for These plans and evaluations must be entrainment by the cooling water intake your site include, but are not be limited submitted to the Director with the structures; and (3) a description of to (1) fish-handling and return systems, permit application. additional chemical, water quality, and (2) wedgewire screens, (3) fine mesh Under § 125.86(c)(2)(iii)(B), you may other anthropogenic stresses on the screens, (4) barrier nets, and (5) aquatic submit data from previous biological source waterbody. The Director might filter barrier systems. The Agency studies performed in the vicinity of the coordinate a review of your list of recognizes that selection of the specific proposed or actual intake if the data are threatened or endangered species with technology or group of technologies for no more than 5 years old so that they the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/ your site will depend on individual reasonably represent existing or National Marine Fisheries Service facility and waterbody conditions. conditions. You must demonstrate that staff to ensure that potential impacts to In the application, you need to such existing data are fully threatened or endangered species have describe the technology(ies) you will representative of the current conditions been addressed. implement at your facility to meet the in the vicinity of the intake and provide The study must evaluate the potential requirements in § 125.84(b)(4) and (5) or documentation showing that the data for cooling water intake structure effects § 125.84(c)(3) and (4), the basis for their were collected by using established and in accordance with § 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A). selection, and the expected level of reliable quality assurance procedures. This evaluation must include (1) a performance. During subsequent permit Before performing the study you must statement of the baseline against which terms, the Director may require you to submit to the Director a plan stating the comparative analyses will be made. implement additional or different how information will be collected to The impingement and entrainment design and construction technologies if support the study. This plan must baselines must be calculated for the the initial technologies you selected and provide (1) a description of the facility by assuming a design of a once- implemented do not meet the proposed technology(ies) to be through cooling water system requirement of minimizing evaluated; (2) a list and description of employing a trash rack and traveling
VerDate 11
screens; (2) an engineering estimate of entrainment, 100 percent mortality may systems, sound barriers). Second, these the efficacy of proposed technologies in be assumed to preclude the need to conventional barrier and return system reducing impacts to fish and shellfish to perform entrainment survival studies. technologies have not been optimized a level comparable to the level that You must then calculate and on a widespread level to date, as would would be achieved by meeting the Track document the expected level of be encouraged by this rule. Such I requirements at the site. To performance of the proposed alternative optimization can be best achieved by demonstrate that the technologies meet technologies for all species found in new facilities, which can match site the ‘‘comparable level’’ requirement, the significant numbers in the source conditions to available technologies. demonstration must show that both waterbody in the vicinity of the intake Third, EPA believes that many facilities impingement and entrainment of all life structure. Such documentation may could achieve further reductions stages of fish and shellfish have been consist of pilot-scale testing at the (estimated 15–30 percent) in reduced to 90 percent or greater of the proposed facility, representative impingement and entrainment by reduction that could be achieved performance data from comparable providing for seasonal flow restrictions, through Track I, or, if impacts other facilities, or both. In preparing the variable speed pumps, and other than impingement mortality and documentation you should specifically innovative flow reduction alternatives. entrainment are considered, that the show that the pilot-scale or comparable Finally, new facilities seeking to comply measures taken will maintain the fish facility data address the following under Track II can choose the specific and shellfish in the waterbody at a factors that may affect technology location of their cooling water intake performance: structures to further optimize the level substantially similar level to that which • would be achieved through Track I. The Physical and chemical watershed of reduction in impingement mortality efficacy projection must include a site- conditions (temperature, freezing and and entrainment (i.e., locate the cooling specific evaluation of technology thawing, tidal conditions, wave action, water intake structure outside of sediment and debris, flow, etc.); biologically productive or sensitive suitability for reducing impingement • and entrainment based on design, Biological watershed conditions areas to the extent this would serve to (individual species, life stages, predator location, and operational specification reduce environmental impact). For species, seasonality, etc.); applied to the characterization and a additional discussion, see Section V.B.2. • Engineering feasibility and long- site-specific evaluation of any Finally, new facilities complying term reliability, and under Track II must submit a additional measures based on the • Operation and maintenance issues. Verification Monitoring Plan in physical, chemical, and biological Available data suggests that characteristics of the site; and (3) a accordance with § 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A). alternative design and construction The plan must include information on characterization of impingement and technologies for cooling water intake entrainment survival estimates of the how the facility will conduct a structures can achieve the level of monitoring study to verify the full-scale proposed alternative technology based reduction in impingement mortality and on case studies in the vicinity of the performance of the proposed entrainment required under Track I. technologies and of any additional cooling water intake structure and/or Technologies such as fine and wide- site-specific technology prototype measures. The plan must describe the mesh wedgewire screens, as well as frequency of monitoring and the studies, and a characterization of fish aquatic filter barrier systems, have been and shellfish propagation and survival parameters to be monitored. The shown to reduce mortality from Director will use the verification based, for example, on case studies impingement by up to 99 percent or monitoring to verify that you are documenting the efficacy of any greater compared with conventional meeting the level of impingement and additional measures performed at once-through systems. In addition, other entrainment expected and that fish and similar sites. types of barrier nets may achieve shellfish are being maintained at the To demonstrate that you will reduce reductions of 80 to 90 percent, and level expected. The Director will then impingement mortality and entrainment modified screens and fish return determine whether to approve the use of to a level of reduction comparable to the systems, fish diversion systems, and the suite of alternative technologies in level that you would achieve if you fine mesh traveling screens and fish subsequent permit issuance. implemented Track I requirements at return systems have achieved Verification monitoring must start your site, you will need to develop a reductions in impingement mortality during the first year that the cooling conceptual engineering design of a ranging from 60 to 90 percent greater water intake structure begins operation hypothetical recirculating water system than conventional once-through and continue for a sufficient period of for your facility, including the estimated systems. Similarly, with regard to time to demonstrate that the facility is intake flow. The estimated intake flow entrainment, although there is less reducing impingement mortality and should take into account an optimized available full scale performance data, entrainment to a level of reduction system in which the volume of intake aquatic filter barrier systems, fine mesh comparable to the level the facility flow/blowdown is minimized to the wedgewire screens, and fine mesh would have been achieved by maximum extent feasible. The traveling screens with fish return implementing the flow reduction and conceptual design should also include systems have been shown to achieve 80 design velocity requirements of Track I. proposed design and construction to 90 percent greater reduction in technologies that would be used to mortality from entrainment compared 4. Data To Support a Request for minimize impingement mortality and with conventional once-through Alternative Requirements entrainment pursuant to § 125.84(b)(4) systems. Several additional factors If, pursuant to § 125.85(a), you request and (5). Finally, you should estimate the suggest that these performance levels that an alternative requirement less expected level of impingement and can be improved upon. First, some of stringent than those specified in entrainment associated with the the cooling water intake structure § 125.84 be required in your permit, hypothetical intake structure for all technology performance data reviewed § 125.85(b) places the burden on you to species found in substantial numbers in is from the 1970’s and 1980’s and does show that your compliance costs are source waterbody in the vicinity of the not reflect recent developments and wholly out of proportion to the costs intake structure. In estimating innovation (e.g., aquatic filter barrier EPA considered during development of
VerDate 11
the requirements at issue, or that Director would review the supporting the Comprehensive Demonstration compliance with the national standard material the applicant provided in the Study. When the applicant proposes to will result in significant adverse impact permit application. The Director would rely on existing studies, the Director to local air quality, local water also review the engineering drawings would assess the data quality and the resources, or local energy markets. and the locational maps the applicant relevance to the proposed facility. When Compliance costs that EPA considered provided, documenting the physical new biological surveys are proposed, were subdivided into one-time costs and placement of the cooling water intake the Director would determine whether recurring costs. Examples of one-time structure. they fully characterize the waterbody costs include capital and permit For Track I facilities, the Director’s potentially impacted by impingement application costs. Examples of recurring next step would be to review the design and entrainment. Where pilot-scale costs include operation and requirements for intake flow and demonstrations are proposed, the maintenance costs, permit renewal velocity. For a new facility with an Director would evaluate whether they costs, and monitoring, recordkeeping, intake flow equal to or greater than 10 are generally representative of full-scale and reporting costs. MGD that is required to reduce its operations. After the study is intake flow to a level commensurate completed, the Director would review C. How Will the Director Determine the with that which could be attained by a the applicant’s analysis, specifically to Appropriate Cooling Water Intake closed-cycle recirculating cooling water determine whether the proposed Structure Requirements? system, the Director would review the alternative technology(ies) will reduce The Director’s first step would be to narrative description of the closed-cycle impingement mortality and entrainment determine whether the facility is recirculating cooling water system to a level of reduction comparable to the covered by this rule If the answer is yes design and any engineering calculations level that the facility would achieve if to all the following questions, the to ensure that the new facility is it complied with the Track I facility must comply with the complying with the requirement and requirements for reducing intake requirements of this final rule. that the make-up and blowdown flows capacity and design velocity, or if the (1) Is the facility a ‘‘new facility’’ as have been minimized. If the flow proposed measures in conjunction with defined in § 125.83? reduction requirement is met by reusing the proposed technologies will maintain (2) Does the new facility withdraw or recycling water withdrawn for the fish and shellfish in the waterbody cooling water from waters of the U.S.; cooling purposes, the Director must at a substantially similar level to that OR does the facility obtain cooling review documentation that the amount which would be achieved. The Director water by any sort of contract or of cooling water that is not reused or would also review the facility’s arrangement with an independent recycled has been minimized. Technology Verification Plan for post- (supplier or multiple suppliers) of The velocity requirement is based on operational monitoring to demonstrate cooling water if the supplier(s) the design through-screen or through- that the technologies are performing as withdraw(s) water from waters of the technology velocity as defined in predicted. U.S. and is not a public water system? § 125.83. For Track I facilities, the The proportional flow requirement (3) Is at least 25 percent of the water maximum design velocity would always applicable to all facilities is based on withdrawn by the facility used for be 0.5 ft/s. To determine whether the waterbody type. To determine whether cooling purposes? new facility meets the maximum design the new facility meets the flow (4) Does the new facility have a design velocity requirement, the Director requirement, the Director would first intake flow of greater than 2 million would review the narrative description verify the new facility’s determination 98 gallons per day (MGD)? of the design, structure, equipment, and of the waterbody flow for the respective (5) Does the new facility discharge operation used to meet the velocity waterbody type (e.g., annual mean flow pollutants to waters of the U.S., requirement. The Director would also and low flow for freshwater river or including storm water-only discharges, review the design calculations that stream). The Director would review the such that the facility has or is required demonstrate that the maximum design source-water flow data the facility to have an NPDES permit? velocity would be met. In reissuing provided in the permit application. The If these final regulations are permits, the Director would review Director should consider using available applicable to the applicant, the second velocity monitoring data to confirm that USGS data (for freshwater rivers and step would be to determine the the facility is not exceeding the initial streams) to verify the flow data in the locational factors associated with the design velocity calculated at the start of permit application. Then the Director new facility’s cooling water intake commercial service. would review any supporting structure. The Director would first Under Track I, the Director would documentation and engineering review the information that the new then review the applicant’s Design and calculations that demonstrate that the facility provided to validate the source Construction Technology Plan (if the new facility would meet the flow waterbody type in which the cooling applicant is located in an area where requirements. To verify the flow data water intake structure is located such technologies are required) and the the new facility provides for an estuary (freshwater stream or river, lake or applicant’s Source Water Baseline or a tidal river, the Director would reservoir, estuary or tidal river, or Biological Characterization data. During review the facility’s calculation of the ocean). (As discussed above, the each permit renewal, the Director would tidal excursion. applicant would need to identify the then review monitoring data, The final regulations at § 125.84(e) source waterbody type in the permit application data, and other supporting require compliance with any more application and provide the appropriate information to determine whether the stringent requirements relating to the documentation to support the applicant needs to implement location, design, construction, or waterbody type classification.) The additional or different design and capacity of a cooling water intake construction technologies (see structure or monitoring requirements at 98 If the answer is no to these flow parameters and discussion of § 125.89(a)(2) below). a new facility that a Director deems yes to all the other questions, the Director would use best professional judgment on a case-by-case Under Track II, the Director would necessary to comply with any provision basis to establish permit conditions that ensure receive and should review the of State law, including state water compliance with section 316(b). applicant’s proposed plan for preparing quality standards, including designated
VerDate 11
uses, criteria, and antidegradation with additional information after the • Through-screen or through- provisions. design and construction of the cooling technology velocity monitoring data and water intake structure to demonstrate records to show that the facility is being D. What Will I Be Required to Monitor? that the facility is operating and operated and maintained as designed to At § 125.87, today’s final rule requires maintaining the cooling water intake continue to meet the velocity biological monitoring and visual or structure in a manner such that the requirement (§ 125.87(b)). remote inspections at all facilities. Track velocity requirement continues to be • Records from visual or remote I facilities and Track II facilities that met. The Agency considers this the most inspections to show that technologies rely on specified velocity levels as part appropriate parameter to monitor, installed are being operated properly of their alternative technology(ies) are because, although the facility might be and function as they were designed also required to monitor screen head designed to meet the requirement, (§ 125.87(c)). loss and velocity. proper operation and maintenance is Facilities are required to keep records Both Track I and Track II facilities necessary to maintain the open area of and report the above information in a must conduct biological monitoring for the screen and intake structure, yearly status report in § 125.88. In impingement and entrainment to assess ensuring that the design intake velocity addition, Directors may perform their the presence, abundance, life stages, and is maintained. Head loss can easily be own compliance inspections as deemed mortality (eggs, larvae, post larvae, monitored by measuring and comparing appropriate in accordance with 40 CFR juveniles, and adults) of aquatic the height of the water in front of and 122.41. organisms (fish and shellfish) impinged behind the screen or other technology. or entrained during operation of the F. What Are the Respective Federal, Track I facilities that use devices other State, and Tribal Roles? cooling water intake structure. These than screens would be required to data would also be used by the measure the actual velocity at the point Section 316(b) requirements are permitting authority in subsequent of entry through the device. Velocity implemented through NPDES permits. permit terms to determine whether can be measured with velocity meters As discussed in Section II.A today’s additional or modified design and placed at the entrance into the device. final regulations would amend 40 CFR construction technologies are Weekly visual or remote inspections 123.25(a)(36) to add a requirement that reasonably necessary (see discussion of authorized State programs have are required to provide a mechanism for § 125.89(a)(2) in D. below). The facility sufficient legal authority to implement both the new facility and the Director to would be required to conduct today’s requirements (40 CFR part 125, ensure that any technologies that have impingement and entrainment sampling subpart I). Therefore, today’s final rule been implemented for minimizing over a 24-hour period no less than once potentially affects authorized State and adverse environmental impact are being per month when the cooling water Tribal NPDES permit programs. Under maintained and operated in a manner intake structure is in operation and 40 CFR 123.62(e), any existing approved that ensures that they function as report results to the Director annually. section 402 permitting program must be designed. EPA has promulgated this After two years, the Director may revised to be consistent with new requirement so that facilities that approve an applicant’s request for less program requirements within one year frequent biological monitoring if the develop plans and install technologies from the date of promulgation, unless facility provides data to support the could not operate them improperly so the NPDES-authorized State or Tribe request showing that less frequent that adverse environmental impact is must amend or enact a statute to make monitoring would still allow for the not minimized to the extent expected. the required revisions. If a State or Tribe detection of any seasonal and daily The Director would determine the must amend or enact a statute to variations in the species and numbers of actual scope and implementation of the conform with today’s final rule, the individuals that are impinged or visual inspections based on the types of revision must be made within two years entrained. The Director should approve technologies installed at your facility. of promulgation. States and Tribes a request for reduced frequency in For example, inspections could be as seeking new EPA authorization to biological monitoring only if the simple as observing bypass and other implement the NPDES program must supporting data show that the fish handling systems to ensure that comply with the requirements when technologies are consistently performing debris has not clogged the system and authorization is requested. as projected under all operating and rendered it inoperable. In addition to updating their programs environmental conditions and less E. How Will Compliance Be to be consistent with today’s rule, States frequent monitoring would still allow Determined? and Tribes authorized to implement the for the detection of any future NPDES program would be required to performance fluctuations. This rule will be implemented by the implement the cooling water intake Under § 125.87(b), Track I facilities Director placing conditions consistent structure requirements following are required to monitor the head loss with this rule in NPDES permits. promulgation of the final regulations. across the intake screens to obtain a Compliance with permit conditions The requirements must be implemented correlation of those values with the implementing this rule require the upon permit issuance and reissuance. design intake velocity (Track I) or other following data and information: Duties of an authorized State or Tribe • specified velocity (Track II) at minimum Data submitted with the NPDES under this regulation include ambient source-water surface elevation permit application to show that the • Verification of a permit applicant’s (according to best professional judgment facility is in compliance with location, determination of source waterbody based on available hydrological data). design, construction, and capacity classification and the flow or volume of The maximum head loss across the requirements (§ 125.86). certain waterbodies at the point of the screen for each cooling water intake • Compliance monitoring data and intake; structure must be used to determine records, including those for • Verification that the intake compliance with the velocity impingement and entrainment structure maximum flow rate is less requirement in § 125.84(b)(2) and (c)(1). monitoring, to show that impingement than the maximum allowable as a The data collected by monitoring this and entrainment impacts are being proportion of waterbody flow for certain parameter would provide the Director minimized (§ 125.87(a)). waterbody types;
VerDate 11
• Verification that a Track I permit minimizing adverse environmental discretion to establish alternative applicant’s design intake velocity impact on a national level. In some requirements for new facility cooling calculations meet applicable regulatory cases, however, data that could affect water intake structures. EPA takes this requirements; the economic practicability of position because this final rule would • Verification that a Track I permit requirements might not have been establish requirements for cooling water applicant’s intake design and reduction available to be considered by EPA intake structures at any type of new in capacity are commensurate with a during the development of today’s rule. facility in any industrial category above level that can be attained by a closed- Therefore, EPA is including § 125.85 to the flow threshold. 99 Thus, in some cycle recirculating cooling water system allow for adjustment of the instances it might be possible that the that has minimized make-up and requirements of § 125.84 in certain costs of complying with today’s final blowdown flows; limited circumstances. requirements would be wholly out of • Verification that a Track II permit Section 125.85 would allow the proportion to the costs EPA considered applicant’s Comprehensive Director, in the permit development and determined to be economically Demonstration Study demonstrates that process, to set alternative best practicable. As discussed in the the proposed alternative technologies technology available requirements that Economic Analysis Chapter 7, EPA has will reduce the impacts to fish and are less stringent than the nationally analyzed the cost of compliance with shellfish to levels comparable to those applicable requirements. Under today’s final requirements for all the facility would achieve if it met the § 125.85(a), any interested person may facilities projected to be built in the Track I requirements; request that alternative requirements be reasonably foreseeable future, as well as • Development of draft and final imposed in the permit. Section other types of facilities that might be NPDES permit conditions for the 125.85(a) provides that alternative built at later dates (such as large base- applicant implementing applicable requirements that are less stringent than load steam electric generating facilities section 316(b) requirements pursuant to the requirements of § 125.84 would be that do not use combined-cycle this rule; and approved only if the Administrator technology) and concludes that these • Ensuring compliance with permit determines that compliance with the compliance costs would be conditions based on section 316(b) requirement at issue would result in economically practicable for all types of requirements. compliance costs wholly out of facilities the Agency considered. EPA will implement these proportion to the costs considered However, should an individual new requirements where States or Tribes are during development of the requirement facility demonstrate that costs of not authorized to implement the NPDES at issue or in significant adverse impacts compliance for a new facility would be program. on local air quality, local water wholly out of proportion to the costs resources or local energy markets; the G. Are Permits for New Facilities Subject EPA considered and determined to be alternative requirement requested is no to Requirements Under Other Federal economically practicable, the Director less stringent than justified by the Statutes? would have authority to adjust best wholly out of proportion cost or technology available requirements EPA’s NPDES permitting regulations significant adverse impact; and the at 40 CFR 122.49 contain a list of accordingly. alternative requirements will ensure Under § 125.85(a), alternative Federal laws that might apply to compliance with other applicable federally issued NPDES permits. These requirements would not be granted provisions of the Clean Water Act and based on a particular facility’s ability to include the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, any applicable requirements of State 16 U.S.C. 1273 et seq.; the National pay for technologies that would result in law. compliance with the requirements of Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 Because new facilities have a great § 125.84. Thus, so long as the costs of U.S.C. 470 et seq.; the Endangered degree of flexibility in their siting, in compliance are not wholly out of Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; the how their cooling water intake proportion to the costs EPA considered Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 structures are otherwise located, and in and determined to be economically U.S.C. 1451 et seq.; and the National the design, construction, and sizing of Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. the structure, cost is the primary factor practicable, the ability of an individual 4321 et seq. See 40 CFR 122.49 for a that would justify the imposition of less facility to pay in order to attain brief description of each of those laws. stringent requirements as part of the compliance with the rule would not In addition, the provisions of the alternative requirements approach. This support the imposition of alternative Magnuson-Stevens Fishery is because other factors affecting the requirements. EPA has allowed for alternative Conservation and Management Act, 16 location, design, construction, and requirements where the facility U.S.C. 1801 et seq., relating to essential capacity of cooling water intake demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the fish habitat might be relevant. Nothing structures at new facilities can be Director, that at a local level, the air in this final rulemaking authorizes addressed by modifications that may quality impacts, non-impingement and activities that are not in compliance have cost implications. EPA notes that entrainment aquatic effects, or energy with these or other applicable Federal alternate discharge standards are not impacts of complying with the laws. allowed in the somewhat analogous case of the new source performance requirements of § 125.84 are significant H. Alternative Requirements standards that EPA establishes under and justify a different approach to Today’s rule establishes national section 306 of the CWA for the regulating cooling water intake requirements for new facilities. EPA has discharge of effluent from new sources structures. taken into account all the information in particular industrial categories. Section 125.85(a) specifies procedures that it was able to collect, develop, and However, because EPA is acting under to be used in the establishment of solicit regarding the location, design, a separate authority in this rule, section alternative requirements. The burden is construction, and capacity of cooling 316(b) of the CWA, and because section 99 Except for facilities in the offshore and coastal water intake structures at new facilities. 316(b) of the CWA is silent concerning subcategories of the oil and gas extraction point EPA concludes that these requirements this issue, EPA believes it is reasonable source category as defined under 40 CFR 435.10 reflect the best technology available for to interpret section 316(b) to give EPA and 40 CFR 435.40.
VerDate 11
on the person requesting the alternative Chapter 2 of the Technical of the applicable requirements requirement to demonstrate that Development Document outlines EPA’s independent of the rule, the cost alternative requirements should be approach to estimating the facility-level estimates did not include any costs for imposed and that the appropriate costs associated with this rule. EPA meeting that requirement. For example, requirements of § 125.85 (a) have been estimated costs for a series of model EPA estimates that 74 of the 83 met. The person requesting the facilities, based on their cooling system proposed new generating facilities alternative requirements should refer to type (once-through or recirculating already plan to build a recirculating wet all relevant information, including the system), the type of water body from cooling tower, so only 9 facilities are support documents for this rulemaking, which the intake structure withdraws assumed to incur costs for complying all associated data collected for use in (freshwater or marine water), and a with the flow reduction requirement at developing each requirement, and other measure of the facility’s size (generating § 124.84(b)(1) of the final rule. relevant information that is kept on capacity for steam-electric generating EPA used annual forecasts of new public file by EPA. capacity plants and design intake flow capacity additions from the AEO2001 to for manufacturers). Model facility predict how many of the 83 new VIII. Economic Analysis characteristics were derived from generating facilities will begin operation The total estimated annualized specific new facilities predicted to be in each year between 2001 and 2020. compliance costs of today’s final rule is built based on Resource Data EPA then distributed the new facilities $48 million.100 This estimate includes International’s NEWGen Database, and estimated to install a cooling tower incremental costs incurred by new from existing facilities based on evenly over the years with projected facilities that begin operation between responses to the section 316(b) industry new facilities. For example, EPA 2001 and 2020. Facilities not already survey of existing facilities (see estimates that three of the 14 new in- meeting section 316(b) requirements discussion below) and U.S. Department scope coal-fired facilities are planning incur several types of costs under of Energy information. EPA estimated to build a once-through system in the today’s final rule. One-time costs of the compliance costs for the 121 new baseline. The cost analysis therefore rule include capital technology costs facilities estimated to begin operation assumes that the 1st, 6th, and 11th coal- and costs for the initial permit between 2001 and 2020, based on model fired facility to begin operation will application. Recurring costs include facility characteristics and the incur costs of a recirculating wet cooling operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, requirements of today’s final rule. EPA tower. An additional coal facility which permit renewal costs, and costs for amortized capital cost estimates over 30 plans to have a cooling pond was monitoring, record keeping, and years.101 EPA projected construction of treated as having a once-through system reporting. EPA’s cost estimates are 121 new facilities over the next 20 years in the baseline and was also costed with presented in Chapters 6 and 7 of the after promulgation of the final rule. a cooling tower.103 This facility was Economic Analysis and in the Technical assumed to be the 2nd to begin Development Document. A. Electric Generation Sector operation. EPA’s assumptions on when Today’s final rule provides for a two- For the period 2001 through 2020, new Track I coal facilities will begin track approach to comply with the rule’s EPA estimates that 83 new electric operation leads to an overestimate of the requirements. Facilities that already generation facilities will be subject to total costs of this rule because higher plan to install a closed-cycle cooling today’s final rule.102 EPA identified cost facilities are over represented system in the baseline are assumed to these facilities based on three main data among the coal facilities beginning choose Track I, the ‘‘fast track.’’ These sources: (1) The U.S. Department of operation early in the 20-year analysis facilities will incur only the costs of Energy’s Annual Energy Outlook 2001 period. Additionally, EPA estimates that installing fish baskets and a fish return (AEO2001); (2) Resource Data five of the 69 new in-scope combined- system if they would not have already International’s NEWGen Database cycle facilities would install a elected to install these technologies (February 2001 version); and (3) the recirculating wet cooling tower as a independent of the rule. EPA records section 316(b) industry survey of result of the rule. The cost analysis document that the screens were sized to existing facilities. Because the facilities therefore assumes that the 1st, 16th, reduce the velocity. Facilities that do are new facilities that have not yet been 30th, 44th, and 58th combined-cycle not plan to install a closed-cycle cooling built, EPA necessarily had to project facility to begin operation will incur system in the baseline are assumed to certain aspects of the facilities. Hence, costs of a recirculating wet cooling choose Track II. These facilities will the facilities are model facilities. For tower. install alternative technologies of their more information on EPA’s facility Total annualized costs for the 83 new choice that will reduce impingement modeling, see Chapter 5 of the facility electric generators are estimated mortality and entrainment to a level of Economic Analysis. to be $34.7 million (using a 7 percent reduction comparable to the level the EPA estimated facility-level costs for discount rate). The lowest annualized facility would achieve if it met the the 83 new electric generation facilities compliance cost for any electric Track I requirements. The alternative found to be within the scope of this rule generator is estimated to be technologies considered in the cost by comparing each facility’s projected analysis are further discussed in baseline characteristics with the 103 In some states, a cooling pond is considered Chapter 5 of the Technical Development incremental requirements of the rule. If a water of the U.S. In these states, a plant with such a facility already planned to fulfill any a cooling system would have to comply with the Document. recirculating requirements of the final section 316(b) New Facility Rule. In those states where a 100 The estimated annualized compliance costs 101 The amortization period was selected to cooling pond is not considered a water of the U.S., are presented as a single cost to represent the correspond to the estimated useful life of the a plant would not have to comply with the highestpotential implementation costs to industry. technologiesrequired for compliance with this rule. recirculating requirements of this rule. The costing For example, although such costs are based on EPA conducted a sensitivity analysis using a 15- analysis made the conservative assumption that estimates of howmany facilities will choose yearamortization period (see Chapter 7 of the facilities with a cooling pond would have to comply compliance under Track I and Track II, even Economic Analysis). with the recirculating requirements. These facilities estimated to follow TrackII have been 102 See Section IV.A. above or Chapter 5 of the recirculating facilities with cooling ponds were assumed to ultimately have to install closed-cycle Economic Analysis for underlying estimates and therefore costed as if they had a once-through recirculating cooling water systems. methods used for estimating the cost of the rule. system in the baseline.
VerDate 11
approximately $170,000; the lowest estimated based on industry growth the section 316(b) industry survey of annualized cost per megawatt of rates (derived from the U.S. Industry existing facilities. EPA used the same generating capacity is estimated to be and Trade Outlook 2000 and industry- unit costs and methods as for new $153. The highest annualized cost is specific sources, such as Kline’s Guide electric generators. estimated to be $19.1 million; the to the Chemical Industry) and responses Total annualized costs for the 38 new highest cost per megawatt of generating to the section 316(b) industry survey. manufacturing facilities are estimated to capacity is estimated to be $11,640. Facility-specific operational be $13.0 million. The lowest annualized Sixty-nine facilities are expected to have characteristics of the cooling water compliance cost for any facility is relatively low annualized compliance intake structures, economic and approximately $175,000; the highest costs (below $200,000 per facility), financial characteristics of the projected annualized cost is $1.6 million; the while 8 facilities will have annualized new facilities, and waterbody type and average annualized costs for the costs exceeding $1 million per other locational information were not remaining 36 manufacturing facilities facility.104 The other facilities would available. EPA assumed that the centers around $494,000 per facility. have costs between $200,000 and $1 Five of the manufacturing facilities million per facility. characteristics of new facilities in a given 4-digit SIC code will be similar to incur annualized costs less than B. Manufacturing Sector the characteristics of existing facilities $200,000 per facility, and one chemicals For the period 2001 through 2020, in that same SIC code. Compliance costs facility incurs annualized costs EPA projected that 38 new were therefore calculated based on the exceeding $1 million. manufacturing facilities will incur costs characteristics of existing facilities by Exhibit 4 provides a summary of the to comply with today’s final rule. All of SIC code, source water type, cooling estimated annualized compliance costs these facilities are model facilities system type, and flow, using data from for today’s final rule.
EXHIBIT 4.—NATIONAL ANNUALIZED COSTS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE SECTION 316(B) NEW FACILITY REGULATION [in $2000, millions]
Number of Total projected new Capital and Recurring annualized Industry category in-scope permit applica- costs compliance facilities tion costs costs
Electric Generators: Combined-Cycle ...... 69 $3.7 $9.6 $13.3 Coal-Fired ...... 14 4.1 17.3 21.4
Total Generators ...... 83 7.8 26.9 34.7 Manufacturing Facilities: SIC 26 Pulp & paper ...... 2 0.2 0.3 0.5 SIC 28 Chemicals ...... 22 2.7 4.1 6.8 SIC 29 Petroleum ...... 2 0.3 0.5 0.8 SIC 331 Iron & steel ...... 10 1.9 2.8 4.6 SIC 333/335 Aluminum ...... 2 0.1 0.1 0.2
Total Manufacturing ...... 38 5.2 7.8 13.0 All Projected New Facilities ...... 121 12.9 34.7 47.7
C. Economic Impacts whole. Because EPA does not expect generation facilities are expected to The estimated annualized compliance many facilities to be affected and does meet most of the rule’s requirements in costs would represent a small portion of not expect the costs of the rule to create the baseline. Only a small percentage of the estimated revenues for almost all of a barrier to entry or to create a the total number of facilities in each of the new facilities subject to today’s rule. significant change in productivity, EPA the manufacturing sectors will be Costs as a percentage of baseline does not expect today’s final rule to affected by the final rule. EPA therefore revenues would be less than 1 percent cause significant changes in industry concludes that this rule will not result for all but nine of the facilities. Of these productivity, competition, prices, in a significant impact on industries or nine facilities, only 3 would experience output, foreign trade, or employment. the economy. costs as a percentage of baseline The baseline revenues and the modest costs for each facility subject to today’s D. Cost and Economic Impacts of Other revenues of 3 percent or more. 105 EPA’s Alternatives discussion of cost impacts is presented rule are sufficient to preclude any in Chapter 7 of the Economic Analysis. barriers to entry. In addition to today’s final rule, EPA Impacts at the industry level are EPA therefore expects the final rule to estimated the costs and economic expected to be very limited because the be economically practicable for the impacts of several alternative regulatory projected number and total capacity of industries as a whole. The rule is not options. The first alternative option that the new facilities that are within the expected to result in any significant EPA considered would be to apply the scope of today’s final rule are generally impact on generation and distribution of Track I requirements of today’s final small compared with the industry as a electricity, because most of the electric rule only to facilities withdrawing from
104 The higher-cost electric generators are 105 Three coal facilities would have annualized annualized costs greater than 1 but less than 3 expected to begin operation in the years 2004, 2005 costs between 3.3 percent and 5.2 percent of percent of revenues. (two facilities), 2007 (two facilities), 2010, 2013, revenues. Sixelectric generators would have and 2017.
VerDate 11
estuaries, tidal rivers, Great Lakes, and NEWGen database, there is some general impingement and entrainment. In oceans. Under this option, the definition information about facility locations, but general, if the quantity of water and number of new facilities subject to details of intake characteristics and the withdrawn is large relative to the flow the rule would not change, but some ecology of the surrounding waterbody of the source waterbody, water facilities would incur less stringent are unavailable. For facilities projected withdrawal would tend to concentrate compliance requirements. EPA into the future, there is no locational organisms and increase numbers estimates that the total annualized information at all. Site-specific impinged and entrained. Thus, the final compliance costs for this alternative information is critical in predicting flow requirements seek to reduce would be $36.3 million. The second benefits, because studies at existing impingement and entrainment by alternative option considered by EPA facilities demonstrate that benefits are limiting the proportion of the waterbody would impose more stringent highly variable across facilities and flow that can be withdrawn. compliance requirements on the electric locations. Even similar facilities on the The following five examples from generating segment of the industry. It is same waterbody can have very different studies at existing facilities offer some based wholly or in part on a zero intake- benefits depending on the aquatic indication of the relative magnitude of flow (or nearly zero, extremely low- ecosystem in the vicinity of the facility monetary damages associated with flow) requirement, commensurate with and intake-specific characteristics such cooling water intake structures. These levels achievable through the use of dry as location, design, construction, and examples exhibit the magnitude of cooling systems. New manufacturing capacity. impingement and entrainment, on a per facilities would not be subject to these In general, the probability of facility basis, that could be significantly stricter requirements but would have to impingement and entrainment at future reduced in the future for similar steam comply with the requirements of today’s cooling water intake structure locations electric facilities under this final rule. In final rule. EPA estimated costs for this depends on intake and species the following discussion, the potential alternative by assuming that the dry characteristics that influence the benefits of lowering intake flows to a cooling standard would apply to electric intensity, time, and spatial extent of level commensurate with those of a generators on all waters of the U.S. The interactions of aquatic organisms with a closed-cycle recirculating cooling water costs of this option are estimated to be facility’s cooling water intake structure system (for the projected 90 percent of $490.7 million per year. and the physical, chemical, and facilities not already planning to use The first alternative regulatory option biological characteristics of the source such systems) is illustrated by considered by EPA would have lower waterbody. Flows commensurate with comparisons of once-through and total costs than today’s final rule. A closed-cycle cooling systems (which are closed-cycle cooling systems (e.g., the regulatory framework based on dry one part of the basis for best technology Brayton Point and Hudson River cooling towers for some or all electric available) withdraw water from a facilities). The potential benefits of generators is the most expensive option. natural waterbody, circulate the water additional requirements defined by Compared with today’s final rule, this through the condensers, and then send regional permit directors are option would impose an additional cost it to a cooling tower or cooling pond demonstrated by operational changes of $443 million, or $6,910 per megawatt before recirculating it back through the implemented to reduce impingement of generating capacity, on the electric condensers. Because cooling water is and entrainment (e.g., the Pittsburg and generating sector. recirculated, closed-cycle systems Contra Costa facilities). The Ludington generally reduce the water flow from 72 example demonstrates how IX. Potential Benefits Associated With percent to 98 percent, thereby using impingement and entrainment losses of Reducing Impingement and only 2 percent to 28 percent of the water forage species can lead to reductions in Entrainment used by once-through systems. It is economically valuable species. Finally, To provide an indication of the generally assumed that this would result the potential benefits of implementing potential benefits of adopting best in a comparable reduction in additional design and construction technology for cooling water intake impingement mortality and technologies to increase survival of structures, this section presents entrainment. organisms impinged or entrained is information from existing sources on Fish species with free-floating, early illustrated by the application of impingement and entrainment losses life stages are highly susceptible to modified intake screens and fish return associated with cooling water intake cooling water intake structure impacts. systems (e.g., the Salem Nuclear structures and the economic benefits Such planktonic organisms lack the Generating Station). associated with reducing these losses. swimming ability to avoid being drawn The first example of the potential Benefits of the regulation come from into intake flows. Species that spawn in benefits of minimizing intake flow and preventing situations such as those nearshore areas, have planktonic eggs associated impingement and discussed below. Examples are drawn and larvae, and are small as adults entrainment is provided by data for the from existing sources because the experience even greater impacts, Brayton Point facility, located on Mt. information needed to quantify and because both new recruits and Hope Bay in Massachusetts. In July value potential reductions in losses at reproducing adults are affected (e.g., bay 1984, the operation of Unit 4 was new facilities is not available. The anchovy in estuaries and oceans). In changed from closed-cycle cooling and reason the information is unavailable is general, higher impingement and piggyback operation to once-through that the exact location of future facilities entrainment are observed in estuaries cooling. Although conversion to once- is unknown. Also unknown are details and near coastal waters because of the through cooling increased intake flow of cooling water intake structure presence of spawning and nursery areas. by about 41 percent, the facility characteristics, such as the exact The final regulatory framework also requested the change because of configuration of intake, the species recognizes that for any given species electrical problems associated with salt present near an intake, the life stages of and cooling water intake structure contamination from Unit 4’s closed- the species at the time they are present, location, the proportion of the cycle cooling canal equipped with spray and the susceptibility of these species to sourcewater flow supplied to the modules. The lower losses expected impingement and entrainment. For cooling water intake structure is a major under closed-cycle operation can be some facilities listed in the new factor affecting the potential for estimated by comparing losses before
VerDate 11
and after this modification. Based on built without recirculating systems in each year.112 113 114 115 116 A local study reports providing predicted 106 or the absence of this rule. Most of the estimated that the consumer surplus of actual 107 losses after the Unit 4 costs projected for the final rule are an additional striped bass caught by a modification, EPA estimates that the associated with installing recirculating recreational angler is $8.87 to $13.77.117 average annual reduction in systems as a result of this final rule. This implies a benefit to the recreational entrainment losses of adult equivalents The third example demonstrates how fishery, from reduced impingement and of catchable fish resulting from closed- impingement and entrainment losses of entrainment of striped bass alone, in the cycle operation of a single unit at forage species can lead to reductions in range of $887,000 to $1,377,000 Brayton Point (reducing the flow of that annually. The monetary benefit of unit from 1,045 MGD to 703 MGD) economically valued species. A random reduced impingement and entrainment would range from 207,254 Atlantic utility model (RUM) was used to of threatened or endangered species menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) 1 and estimate fishery impacts of 155,139 winter flounder (Pleuronectes impingement and entrainment by the might be substantially greater. americanus) 2 to 20,198 tautog (Tautoga Ludington Pumped Storage plant on The final example indicates the onitis) 2 and 7,250 weakfish (Cynoscion Lake Michigan.110 111 This method potential benefits of technologies that regalis) 2 per year. Assuming a estimates changes in demand for can be applied to reduce impingement. proportional change in harvest, the beneficial use of the waterbody as a In its 1999 permit renewal application, lower losses associated with a closed- function of changes in catch rates. The the Salem Nuclear Generating Station in cycle system would be expected to Ludington facility is responsible for the the Delaware Estuary evaluated the result in an increase of 330,000 to 2 loss of about 1 to 3 percent of the total potential benefits of dual-flow, fine million pounds per year in commercial Lake Michigan production of alewife, a mesh traveling screens designed to landings and 42,000 to 128,000 pounds forage species that supports valuable achieve an approach velocity of 0.5 per year in recreational landings. trout and salmon fisheries. It was ft/s.118 Based on the facility’s The second example of the potential estimated that losses of alewife result in projections of net increases in benefits of low intake flow is provided a loss of nearly 6 percent of the angler recreational fisheries that would occur by an analysis of impingement and catch of trout and salmon each year. On with this technology, EPA estimates that entrainment losses at five Hudson River the basis of RUM analysis, the study angler consumer surplus would increase power plants. Estimated fishery losses estimated that if Ludington operations under once-through compared with by $531,247, to $1,780,104 annually in ceased, catch rates of trout and salmon 1999 dollars. Assuming that nonuse closed-cycle cooling indicate that an species would increase by 3.3 to 13.7 average reduction in intake flow of benefits are at least 50 percent of percent annually, amounting to an recreational use benefits, nonuse about 95 percent at the three facilities estimated recreational angling benefit of responsible for the greatest impacts benefits associated with the screens $0.95 million per year (in 1999 dollars) would result in a 30 to 80 percent might be expected to amount to up to for these species alone. reduction in fish losses, depending on $890,052 per year. the species involved.108 An economic The fourth example indicates the A more detailed discussion of cooling analysis estimated monetary damages potential benefits of technologies that water intake structure impacts and under once-through cooling based on have been required in past section potential benefits can be found Chapter the assumption that annual percentage 316(b). Two plants in the San Francisco 11 of the Economic Analysis document. reductions in year-classes of fish result Bay/Delta, Pittsburg, and Contra Costa in California have made changes to their in proportional reductions in fish stocks 112 Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 1996. Best 109 and harvest rates. A low estimate of intake operations to reduce Technology Available: 1995 Technical Report for damages was based on losses at all five impingement and entrainment of striped the Contra Costa and Pittsburg Power Plants. facilities, and a high estimate was based bass Morone saxatilis). These changes Prepared for Central Valley and San Francisco Bay on losses at the three facilities that include flow reduction through variable Regional Water Quality Control Boards. account for most of the impacts. Damage speed pumps. These operational 113 Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 1997. Best estimates under once-through cooling changes have also reduced incidental Technology Available: 1996 Technical Report for the Contra Costa and Pittsburg Power Plants. ranged from about $1.3 million to $6.1 take of several threatened or endangered Prepared for Central Valley and San Francisco Bay million annually in 1999 dollars. Over fish species, including the delta smelt Regional Water Quality Control Boards. the next 20 years, EPA projects that 9 (Hypomesus transpacificus) and several 114 Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 1998. Best out of 83 new power plants would be runs of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus Technology Available: 1997 Technical Report for tshawytscha) and steelhead trout the Contra Costa and Pittsburg Power Plants. 106 Marine Research, Inc. and New England Power (Oncorhynchus mykiss). According to Prepared for Central Valley and San Francisco Bay Company. 1981. Final Environmental Impact Report Regional Water Quality Control Boards. and Sections 316(a) and 316(b) Demonstrations technical reports by the facilities, use of 115 Pacific Gas & Electric Company. 1999. Best Made in Connection with the Proposed conversion these technologies reduced striped bass Technology Available: 1998 Technical Report for of Generating Unit No. 4 from Closed-Cycle to losses by 78 to 94 percent, representing the Contra Costa and Pittsburg Power Plants. Once-through Cooling. an increase in striped bass recreational Prepared for Central Valley and San Francisco Bay 107 New England Power Company and Marine landings averaging about 100,000 fish Regional Water Quality Control Boards. Research Inc. 1995. Brayton Point Station Annual 116 South Energy California. 2000. Best Biological and Hydrological Report, January- Technology Available: 1999 Technical Report for 110 December 1994. Jones, C.A., and Y.D. Sung. 1993. Valuation of the Contra Costa and Pittsburg Power Plants. 108 Boreman, J. And C.P. Goodyear. 1988. Environmental Quality at Michigan Recreational Prepared for Central Valley and San Francisco Bay Estimates of entrainment mortality for striped bass Fishing Sites: Methodological Issues and Policy Regional Water Quality Control Board. and other fish species inhabiting the Hudson River Applications. Prepared under EPA Contract No. 117 Estuary. American Fisheries Society Monograph CR–816247 for the U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. Huppert, D.H. 1989. Measuring the value of fish to anglers: application to central California 4:152–160. 111 Pumped storage facilities do not use cooling 109 Rowe, R.D., C.M. Lang, L.G. Chestnut, D.A. water and are therefore not subject to this final rule. anadromous species. Marine Resource Economics Latimer, D.A. Rae, S.M. Bernow, and D.E. White. However, the concept of economic valuation of 6:89–107. 1995. The New York Electricity Externality Study, losses in forage species is transferable to other types 118 Public Service Electric and Gas Company. Volume 1. Empire State Electric Energy Research of stressors, including cooling water intake 1999. Appendix F, 1999 Permit Renewal Corporation. structures. Application, NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005622.
VerDate 11
X. Regulatory Requirements burden estimates for today’s final rule part 2, and EPA’s Security Manual Part have increased somewhat. III, Chapter 9, dated August 9, 1976. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Compliance with the applicable Planning and Review In the final rule, EPA has revised the requirements of the source water information collection requirements Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR baseline biological characterization to imposed under this final rule (see 51735, October 4, 1993) the Agency allow the use of existing information, §§ 122.21(r), 125.86, 125.87, 125.88, and must determine whether the regulatory which lowers the cost incurred by new 125.89) is mandatory. Before new action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore facilities. However, today’s rule facilities can begin operation, they subject to the Office of Management and includes a Comprehensive would be required first to perform Budget (OMB) review and the Demonstration requirement for those several data-gathering activities as part requirements of the Executive Order. facilities choosing Track II. Cost and of the permit application process. The Order defines a ‘‘significant burden estimates for today’s final rule Today’s rule would require several regulatory action’’ as one that is likely were revised accordingly. distinct types of information collection to result in a rule that may: Burden is defined as the total time, as part of the NPDES application. In • Have an annual effect on the effort, or financial resources expended general, the information would be used economy of $100 million or more or by persons to generate, maintain, retain, to identify which of the requirements in adversely affect in a material way the or disclose or provide information to or today’s final rule applies to the new economy, a sector of the economy, for a Federal agency. This includes the facility, how the new facility would productivity, competition, jobs, the time needed to review instructions; meet those requirements, and whether environment, public health or safety, or develop, acquire, install, and utilize the new facility’s cooling water intake State, local, or Tribal governments or technology and systems for the purposes structure reflects the best technology communities; of collecting, validating, and verifying available for minimizing environmental • Create a serious inconsistency or information, processing and impact. Specific data requirements of otherwise interfere with an action taken maintaining information, and disclosing today’s rule follow: ∑ Intake structure data, consisting of or planned by another agency; and providing information; adjust the intake structure design and a facility • Materially alter the budgetary existing ways to comply with any water balance diagram, to evaluate the impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, previously applicable instructions and potential for impingement and or loan programs or the rights and requirements; train personnel to be able entrainment of aquatic organisms; and obligations of recipients thereof; or to respond to a collection of ∑ • Information on design and Raise novel legal or policy issues information; search data sources; construction technologies implemented arising out of legal mandates, the complete and review the collection of to ensure compliance with the President’s priorities, or the principles information; and transmit or otherwise applicable requirements set forth in set forth in the Executive Order. disclose the information. today’s rule. Pursuant to the terms of Executive The total burden of the information In addition to the information Order 12866, it has been determined collection requirements associated with requirements of the permit application, that this final rule is a ‘‘significant today’s rule is estimated at 121,127 NPDES permits normally specify regulatory action.’’ As such, this action hours. The corresponding estimates of monitoring and reporting requirements was submitted to OMB for review. cost other than labor (labor and non- to be met by the permitted entity. New Changes made in response to OMB labor costs are included in the total cost facilities that fall within the scope of suggestions or recommendations will be of the rule discussed in Section VIII of this rule would be required to perform documented in the public record. this preamble) is $5.3 million for 18 biological monitoring of impingement facilities and 44 States and one Territory B. Paperwork Reduction Act and entrainment, monitoring of the for the first three years after screen or through-screen technology The Office of Management and Budget promulgation of the rule. Non-labor velocity, and visual inspections of the (OMB) has approved the information costs include activities such as capital cooling water intake structure and any collection requirements contained in costs for remote monitoring devices, additional technologies. Additional this rule under the provisions of the laboratory services, photocopying, and ambient water quality monitoring may Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. the purchase of supplies. The burden also be required of facilities depending 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB and costs are for the information on the specifications of their permits. control number 2040–0241. The collection, reporting, and recordkeeping The facility would be expected to information collection requirements requirements for the three-year period analyze the results from its monitoring relate to new electric generation and beginning with the effective date of efforts and provide these results in an manufacturing facilities collecting today’s rule. Additional information annual status report to the permitting information for baseline biological collection requirements will occur after authority. Finally, facilities would be characterization, monitoring of this initial three-year period as new required to maintain records of all impingement and entrainment, facilities continue to be permitted and submitted documents, supporting preparing comprehensive such requirements will be counted in a materials, and monitoring results for at demonstrations, verifying compliance, subsequent information collection least three years. (Note that the director and preparing yearly reports. request. EPA does not consider the may require that records be kept for a Since the proposal, EPA used updated specific data that would be collected longer period to coincide with the life sources and revised the number of under this final rule to be confidential of the NPDES permit.) facilities that will be subject to this rule business information. However, if a All impacted facilities would carry (See Section IV.A.1 of this preamble). respondent does consider this out the specific activities necessary to These new data sources resulted in an information to be confidential, the fulfill the general information collection increase in the number of facilities respondent may request that such requirements. The estimated burden projected as subject to this rule from 98 information be treated as confidential. includes developing a water balance in the proposed rule analysis to 121 in All confidential data will be handled in diagram that can be used to identify the the final rule. As a result, the cost and accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR proportion of intake water used for
VerDate 11
cooling, make-up, and process water. study to show that alternative design characteristics of additional Some of the facilities (those choosing technologies to be installed are technologies to be installed that will Track II) would gather performance data equivalent in performance to the fast reduce impingement and entrainment to determine the effectiveness of track technologies, if data are not and maximize survival of aquatic alternative technologies that reduce publicly available for assessing the organisms. The estimates for some impingement and entrainment to levels performance of certain technologies. facilities also incorporate the cost of commensurate with reductions achieved Some of the facilities would need to sampling, analyzing, and reporting the through use of recirculating wet cooling perform additional activities related to type and number of impinged and towers and document the basis of their velocity and flow reduction entrained organisms; velocity determination in a demonstration study. requirements. The burden estimates also monitoring; and biweekly inspections of incorporate the cost of preparing a The burden estimates include sampling, installed technologies. narrative description of the design, assessing the source waterbody, structure, equipment, and operational Exhibit 5 presents a summary of the estimating the magnitude of features required to meet velocity and maximum burden estimates for a facility impingement and entrainment, and flow reductions. to prepare a permit application and reporting results in a comprehensive In addition to the activities mentioned monitor and report on cooling water demonstration for certain facilities. The above, some facilities would need to intake structure operations as required burden also includes conducting a pilot prepare and submit a plan describing by this rule.
EXHIBIT 5.—MAXIMUM BURDEN AND COSTS PER FACILITY FOR NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION AND MONITORING AND REPORTING ACTIVITIES
Burden Other direct Activities (hr) Labor cost costs (lump sum) a
Start-up activities ...... 43 $1,585 $50 Permit application activities ...... 146 4,598 500 Source waterbody flow information ...... 104 3,010 100 Source water baseline biological characterization data ...... 265 8,975 750 CWIS flow reduction requirements (Track I) ...... 108 3,261 400 CWIS velocity requirements (Track I) ...... 138 4,428 1,000 Design and construction technology plan (Track I) ...... 85 2,840 50 Comprehensive demonstration study plan (Track II) b ...... 383 13,563 1,000 Source water baseline biological characterization study (Track II) ...... 5,178 274,845 13,000 Evaluation of potential CWIS effects (Track II) ...... 2,577 135,141 500
Subtotal ...... 9,027 452,246 17,350
Maximum Burden and Costs per Facility for Annual Monitoring and Reporting Activities
Biological monitoring (impingement) ...... 388 20,240 650 Biological monitoring (entrainment) ...... 776 41,035 4,000 Velocity monitoring ...... 163 4,993 100 Visual inspection of installed technology and remote monitoring equipment c ...... 253 8,159 100 Verification monitoring (Track II) d ...... 122 5,146 500 Yearly Status report activities ...... 348 13,071 750
Subtotal ...... 2,050 92,644 6,100 a Cost of supplies, filing cabinets, photocopying, boat renting, etc. b The Comprehensive Demonstration Study also has contracted service costs associated with it. c Remote monitoring equipment also has capital and O&M costs associated with it d The verification monitoring also has contracted services associated with it.
EPA believes that all 44 States and materials, writing permits, and tracking qualifications necessary to complete one territory with NPDES permitting compliance depends on the number of various tasks such as reviewing authority will undergo start-up activities new in-scope facilities that will be built submitted documents and supporting in preparation for administering the in the State/Territory during the ICR materials, verifying data sources, provisions of the new facility rule. As approval period. EPA expects that State planning responses, determining part of these start-up activities, States and Territory technical and clerical staff specific permit requirements, writing and Territories are expected to train will spend time gathering, preparing, the actual permit, and conferring with junior technical staff to review materials and submitting the various documents. facilities and the interested public. submitted by facilities, and then use EPA’s burden estimates reflect the Exhibit 6 provides a summary of the these materials to evaluate compliance general staffing and level of expertise burden estimates for States/Territories with the specific conditions of each that is typical in States/Territories that performing various activities associated facility’s NPDES permit. Each State’s/Territory’s actual burden administer the NPDES permitting with the final rule. associated with reviewing submitted program. EPA considered the time and
VerDate 11
EXHIBIT 6.—ESTIMATING STATE/TERRITORY BURDEN AND COSTS FOR ACTIVITIES
Other direct Activities Burden (hrs) Labor cost cost
Start-up activities (per state/territory) ...... 100 $3,514 $50 State/territory permit issuance activities (per facility) ...... 723 29,128 350 Annual state/territory activities (per facility) ...... 50 1,670 50
An Agency may not conduct or proposals with significant D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as sponsor, and a person is not required to intergovernmental mandates, and Amended by the Small Business respond to a collection of information, informing, educating, and advising Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of unless it displays a currently valid OMB small governments on compliance with 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. control number. The OMB control regulatory requirements. The RFA generally requires an agency numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed EPA has determined that this rule to prepare a regulatory flexibility in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter does not contain a Federal mandate that analysis of any rule subject to notice 15. EPA is amending the table in 40 CFR might result in expenditures of $100 and comment rulemaking requirements part 9 of currently approved ICR control million or more for State, local, and under the Administrative Procedure Act numbers issued by OMB for various Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or regulations to list the information the private sector in any one year. Total or any other statute unless the agency requirements contained in this final annualized compliance and certifies that the rule will not have a rule. implementation costs are estimated to significant economic impact on a be $47.9 million. Of the total costs, the substantial number of small entities. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act private sector accounts for $43.8 million Small entities include small businesses, Title II of the Unfunded Mandates and the government sector (includes small organizations, and small Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public direct compliance costs for facilities governmental jurisdictions. Law 104–4, establishes requirements for owned by government entities) accounts Today’s rule is intended to minimize Federal agencies to assess the effects of for $4.1 million. EPA calculated the adverse environmental impact from their regulatory actions on State, local, annualized costs by estimating initial cooling water intake structures and and Tribal governments and the private and annual expenditures of facilities regulates new facilities that use cooling sector. Under section 202 of UMRA, and regulatory authorities over the 30- water withdrawn directly from waters of EPA generally must prepare a written year period (2001–2030), calculating the the U.S. The primary impact would be statement, including a cost-benefit present value of that stream of on new steam electric generating analysis, for proposed and final rules expenditures using a 7 percent discount facilities (SIC 4911); however, a number with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that might rate. EPA estimates that the highest of new facilities in other industries result in expenditures to State, local, undiscounted cost incurred by the likely will also be regulated, including, and Tribal governments, in the private sector in any one year is but not limited to, paper and allied aggregate, or to the private sector, of approximately $71.2 million and the products (primary SIC 26), chemical and $100 million or more in any one year. highest cost incurred by government allied products (primary SIC 28), Before promulgating an EPA rule for sector in any one year is approximately petroleum and coal products (primary which a written statement is needed, $19.0 million. Thus, today’s rule is not SIC 29), and primary metals (primary section 205 of UMRA generally requires subject to the requirements of sections SIC 33). EPA to identify and consider a 202 and 205 of UMRA. For the purposes of assessing the reasonable number of regulatory EPA has determined that this final impacts of today’s rule on small entities, alternatives and adopt the least costly, rule contains no regulatory small entity is defined as: (1) A small most cost-effective, or least burdensome requirements that might significantly or business according to the Small alternative that achieves the objectives uniquely affect small governments. Business Administration (SBA) size of the rule. The provisions of section Thus, today’s final rule is not subject to standards; (2) A small governmental 205 do not apply when they are the requirements of section 203 of jurisdiction that is a government of a inconsistent with applicable law. UMRA. A municipality that owns or city, county, town, school district or Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to operates a new electric generation special district with a population of less adopt an alternative other than the least facility is the primary category of small than 50,000; and (3) a small costly, most cost-effective, or least government operations that might be organization that is a not-for-profit burdensome alternative if the affected by this rule. Existing data enterprise which is independently Administrator publishes with the final indicate that only four government owned and operated and is not rule an explanation why that alternative owned facilities will be constructed in dominant in its field. After considering was not adopted. Before EPA establishes the next twenty years. All four are the economic impacts of today’s rule on any regulatory requirements that might expected to be owned by large small entities, I certify that this action significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Of these, two are expected will not have a significant economic governments, including Tribal to be State owned, one is projected to impact on a substantial number of small governments, it must have developed be owned by a municipality and one by entities. This rule is expected to regulate under section 203 of the UMRA a small a municipality market. In addition, to only a small number of facilities owned government agency plan. The plan must minimize cost, this final rule excludes by small entities, representing a very provide for notifying potentially facilities that take in less than two (2) small percentage of all facilities owned affected small governments, enabling million gallons per day. Details and by small entities in their respective officials of affected small governments methodologies used for these estimates industries. EPA has estimated that 11 to have meaningful and timely input in are included in the Economic Analysis new facilities owned by small entities the development of EPA regulatory document, which is in the docket. would be regulated by this final rule. Of
VerDate 11
the 11 new facilities owned by small surface water as the source of cooling government jurisdictions to identify entities, 8 are steam electric generating water. An analysis of new combined- small-entity manufacturing facilities. facilities and 3 are manufacturing cycle facilities, identified from the Based on the outreach effort and a facilities. This rule will not regulate any NEWGen database shows a trend toward review of the relevant industry trade small governments or small less use of surface cooling water. The literature, EPA concludes that, although organizations. analysis showed that 66 percent of the the exact number of facilities owned by analyzed facilities use alternative 1. Electric Generation Sector small entities that would be subject to sources of cooling water (e.g., grey the rule is difficult to quantify, it is EPA has described the process by water, ground water, municipal water, evident that for the foreseeable future which prospective new steam electricity or dry cooling). EPA believes this few, if any, small entities would be generating facilities subject to today’s reflects the increased competition for rule were identified in Section IV.A of affected. EPA estimates that only 2.9 water, an heightened awareness of the percent of future facilities in the next this preamble and in Chapter 5 of the need for water conservation, and twenty years owned by small entities Economic Analysis document. As increased local opposition to the use of will use cooling water at levels that described in Chapter 8 of that surface water for power generation. document, EPA then identified those Taken together, the trend toward would bring them within the scope of facilities subject to the rule whose combined-cycle generating technologies, this regulation. owner would be defined as a small which have small cooling water The small number of small entities business. The analysis used the requirements per unit of output, and the subject to this rule in the manufacturing definitions of small businesses movement away from the use of surface sector is not surprising because the established by the Small Business cooling water result in a low projected facilities likely to be subject to the rule Administration (SBA). (The SBA defines number of regulated facilities, despite are large industrial facilities that are not small businesses based on Standard the expected expansion in new generally owned by small entities. There Industrial Classification (SIC) codes and generating capacity. are many reasons for the limited size standards expressed by the number 2. Manufacturing Sector projected number of in-scope new of employees, annual receipts, or facilities owned by small entities. electric output.) The SBA defines a Chapter 5 of the Economic Analysis Depending on which industry sector is small steam electric generator as a firm document shows that 38 new considered, these include industry whose facilities generate 4 million manufacturing facilities are expected to megawatt-hours output or less. EPA has incur compliance costs under today’s downsizing; expansion of capacity at determined that 8 facilities owned by rule. Since EPA’s estimate of new existing facilities as a means of meeting small businesses in the steam electric manufacturing facilities is based on increased demand; mergers and generating industry are likely to be industry growth forecasts and not on acquisitions that reduce the overall regulated by today’s rule. specific planned facilities, actual parent number of firms; and addition of a The estimated annualized compliance firm information was not available. significant number of facilities in at costs that facilities owned by small EPA, therefore, developed profiles of least one industry sector as part of a entities would likely incur represent representative new facilities based on recently completed expansion cycle so between 0.11 and 0.44 percent of the characteristics of existing facilities that additional new facilities are not estimated facility annual sales revenue. identified in EPA’s Industry Survey of expected for the foreseeable future. The All but one electric generating facilities existing facilities. segments of the industries that are the owned by a small firm incur costs less Using SBA size standards for the primary users of cooling water are than 0.3 percent of revenues. The results firm’s SIC Code, only 3 of the 38 new mostly large, capital intensive of this screening analysis indicated very manufacturing facilities are projected to enterprises with few, if any, small low impacts at the facility level. be owned by a small entity. One of the businesses within their ranks. Consequently, the costs to the parent 3 facilities is in the chemicals sector and A final reason why this rule does not small entity would be even lower. two are in the metals sector (in both have a significant economic impact on The absolute number of small entities sectors, a small entity is defined as a a substantial number of small entities is potentially subject to this rule is low. firm with fewer than 1,000 employees). that EPA has established a two (2) MGD This is not unexpected since the total EPA compared annualized costs to number of facilities subject to this rule annual sales revenue to assess impacts flow as the level below which facilities is also low, even though the electric for manufacturing firms. The test was would not be subject to the power industry is currently applied at the facility rather than the requirements of the rule. This minimum experiencing a rapid expansion and firm level, which provides a flow level exempts many facilities using transition due to deregulation and new conservative estimate of the impacts small amounts of water, including Clean Air Act requirements for because the ratio of costs to revenues facilities owned by small entities, while emissions controls, and a large number were relatively lower at the firm level covering approximately 99 percent of of generating plants are under than at the individual facility level. The the total cooling water withdrawn from construction or planned for the early impact analysis showed a negligible the waters of the U.S. Therefore, EPA years of the final rule. First, there is a impact on small entities: very low concludes that there will be a negligible trend toward construction of combined- effects on facility sales revenue (ranging increase in the number of small cycle technologies using natural gas, from 0.04 to 0.08 percent). facilities in these manufacturing which use substantially less cooling EPA has conducted extensive industries subject to today’s final rule. water than other technologies. Second, outreach to industry associations and Exhibit 7 summarizes the results of there has been a decline in the use of organizations representing small small entity analysis.
VerDate 11
EXHIBIT 7.—SUMMARY OF RFA/SBREFA ANALYSIS
Number of Annual compli- facilities ance costs/an- Type of facility owned by nual sales rev- small entities enue
Steam electric generating facilities ...... 8 0.11%–0.44% Manufacturing facilities ...... 3 0.04%–0.08%
Total ...... 11 0.04% to 0.44%
Although this rule will not have a annualized state implementation cost rule, the relationship and distribution of significant economic impact on a over the 30-year analysis period (2001 to power and responsibilities between the substantial number of entities, EPA 2030) is approximately $240,000 total Federal government and the States and nonetheless has tried to reduce the for all States per year. Also, based on local governments are established under impact of this rule on small entities. In meetings and subsequent discussions the CWA (e.g., sections 402(b) and 510); particular, EPA does not require that a with local government representatives nothing in this final rule would alter facility with intake flows equal to or from municipal utilities, EPA believes that. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does greater than 2 MGD and less than 10 that the final new facility rule may not apply to this rule. MGD reduce its intake flow to a level affect, at most, only two large Although section 6 of Executive Order commensurate with use of a closed- municipalities that own steam electric 13132 does not apply to this rule, EPA cycle recirculating cooling system. generating facilities. The annual impacts did consult with State governments and Instead, these facilities are required to on these facilities is not expected to representatives of local governments in use the less costly design and exceed 1,304 burden hours and $36,106 developing the rule. During the construction technologies for (non-labor costs) per facility. development of the section 316(b) rule minimizing entrainment at all locations. The national cooling water intake for new facilities, EPA conducted See 125.84(c)(4). EPA believes that the structure requirements would be several outreach activities through requirements of § 125.84(c) are an implemented through permits issued which State and local officials were economically practicable way for these under the NPDES program. Forty-four informed about the proposed rule and facilities to reduce impingement States and the Virgin Islands are they provided information and mortality and entrainment. EPA currently authorized pursuant to section comments to the Agency. consulted many times with the Small 402(b) of the CWA to implement the EPA also held two public meetings in Business Administration on matters NPDES program. In States not the summer of 1998 to discuss issues associated with this rule. Upon authorized to implement the NPDES related to the section 316(b) rulemaking invitation, EPA met several times with program, EPA issues NPDES permits. effort. Representatives from New York a mix of small businesses interested in Under the CWA, States are not required and Maryland attended the meetings this rule. to become authorized to administer the and provided input to the Agency. The E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism NPDES program. Rather, such Agency also contacted Pennsylvania authorization is available to States if and Virginia to exchange information on Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, they operate their programs in a manner this issue. In addition, EPA Regions 1, August 10, 1999) requires EPA to consistent with section 402(b) and 3, 4, and 9 served as conduits for develop an accountable process to applicable regulations. Generally, these transmittal of section 316(b) information ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by provisions require that State NPDES between the Agency and several States. State and local officials in the programs include requirements that are In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, development of regulatory policies that as stringent as Federal program and consistent with EPA policy to have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies requirements. States retain the ability to promote communications between EPA that have federalism implications’’ is implement requirements that are and State and local governments, EPA defined in the Executive Order to broader in scope or more stringent than specifically solicited comment on the include regulations that have Federal requirements. (See section 510 proposed rule from State and local ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, of the CWA) officials. More recently, EPA met with on the relationship between the national Today’s final rule would not have industry, environmental, and State and government and the States, or on the substantial direct effects on States or on Federal government representatives, distribution of power and local governments because it would not during May, June, and July 2001 to responsibilities among the various change how EPA and the States and discuss regulatory alternatives for the levels of government.’’ local governments interact or their new facility rule. The States that EPA This final rule does not have respective authority or responsibilities consulted with or received public federalism implications. It will not have for implementing the NPDES program. comment from, in general, supported substantial direct effects on the States, Today’s final rule establishes national the technology-based rule which on the relationship between the national requirements for new facilities with focused on reducing the impingement government and the States, or on the cooling water intake structures. NPDES- mortality and entrainment resulting distribution of power and authorized States that currently do not from cooling water intake structures. In responsibilities among the various comply with the final regulations might particular, many States endorsed the 2 levels of government, as specified in need to amend their regulations or MGD threshold, capacity reduction, and Executive Order 13132. Rather, this statutes to ensure that their NPDES proportional flow restrictions. A few final rule would result in minimal programs are consistent with Federal States wanted more flexibility, whereas administrative costs on States that have section 316(b) requirements. See 40 CFR others wanted more stringent an authorized NPDES program. The 123.62(e). For purposes of this final technology-based performance
VerDate 11
standards. EPA believes that it has G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of I. Executive Order 13158: Marine achieved a balance between these two Children From Environmental Health Protected Areas opposite concerns in establishing the Risks and Safety Risks Executive Order 13158 (65 FR 34909, two-track approach. Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, May 31, 2000) requires EPA to F. Executive Order 12898: Federal April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that ‘‘expeditiously propose new science- Actions To Address Environmental (1) is determined to be ‘‘economically based regulations, as necessary, to Justice in Minority Populations and significant’’ as defined under Executive ensure appropriate levels of protection Low-Income Populations Order 12866, and (2) concerns an for the marine environment.’’ EPA may Executive Order 12898 requires that, environmental health or safety risk that take action to enhance or expand to the greatest extent practicable and EPA has reason to believe might have a protection of existing marine protected permitted by law, each Federal agency disproportionate effect on children. If areas and to establish or recommend, as must make achieving environmental the regulatory action meets both criteria, appropriate, new marine protected justice part of its mission. Executive the Agency must evaluate the areas. The purpose of the Executive Order 12898 provides that each Federal environmental health and safety effects Order is to protect the significant agency must conduct its programs, of the planned rule on children, and natural and cultural resources within policies, and activities that substantially explain why the planned regulation is the marine environment, which means affect human health or the environment preferable to other potentially effective ‘‘those areas of coastal and ocean in a manner that ensures that such and reasonably feasible alternatives waters, the Great Lakes and their programs, policies, and activities do not considered by the Agency. This final connecting waters, and submerged lands have the effect of excluding persons rule is not an economically significant thereunder, over which the United (including populations) from rule as defined under Executive Order States exercises jurisdiction, consistent participation in, denying persons 12866 and does not concern an with international law.’’ (including populations) the benefits of, environmental health or safety risk that Today’s final rule implements section or subjecting persons (including EPA has reason to believe may have a 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for populations) to discrimination under disproportionate effect on children. new facilities that use water withdrawn such programs, policies, and activities Therefore, it is not subject to Executive from rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, because of their race, color, or national Order 13045. estuaries, oceans or other waters of the United States (U.S.) for cooling water origin. H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation purposes. The final rule establishes Today’s final rule would require that and Coordination With Indian Tribal national technology-based performance the location, design, construction, and Governments capacity of cooling water intake requirements applicable to the location, structures at new facilities reflect the Executive Order 13175, entitled design, construction, and capacity of best technology available for ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with cooling water intake structures at new minimizing adverse environmental Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR facilities. The national requirements impact. For several reasons, EPA does 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA establish the best technology available not expect that this final rule would to develop an accountable process to for minimizing adverse environmental have an exclusionary effect, deny ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by impact associated with the use of these persons the benefits of the NPDES tribal officials in the development of structures. It also requires the permit program, or subject persons to regulatory policies that have tribal applicant to select and implement discrimination because of their race, implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal design and construction technologies to color, or national origin. The final rule implications’’ is defined in the minimize impingement mortality and applies only to new facilities with Executive Order to include regulations entrainment. cooling water intake structures that that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on EPA expects that this final regulation withdraw waters of the U.S. As one or more Indian tribes, on the will reduce impingement and discussed previously, EPA anticipates relationship between the Federal entrainment at new facilities. The rule that this final rule would not affect a government and the Indian tribes, or on will afford protection of aquatic large number of new facilities; therefore, the distribution of power and organisms at individual, population, any impacts of the final rule would be responsibilities between the Federal community, or ecosystem levels of limited. The final rule does include government and Indian tribes.’’ ecological structures. Therefore, EPA location criteria that would affect siting This final rule does not have tribal expects today’s rule will advance the decisions made by new facilities, these implications. It will not have substantial objective of the Executive Order to criteria are intended to prevent direct effects on tribal governments, on protect marine areas. deterioration of our nation’s aquatic the relationship between the Federal resources. EPA expects that this final government and Indian tribes, or on the J. Executive Order 13211 (Energy rule would preserve the health of distribution of power and Effects) aquatic ecosystems located in responsibilities between the Federal This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy reasonable proximity to new cooling government and Indian tribes, as action’’ as defined in Executive Order water intake structures and that all specified in Executive Order 13175. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations populations, including minority and Given the available data on new That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, low-income populations, would benefit facilities and the applicability Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355; May from such improved environmental thresholds in the final rule, EPA 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have conditions. In addition, because the estimates that no new facilities subject a significant adverse effect on the final rule would help prevent decreases to this final rule will be owned by tribal supply, distribution, or use of energy. in populations of fish and other aquatic governments. This rule does not affect Track I of the final section 316(b) new species, it is likely to help maintain the tribes in any way in the foreseeable facility rule requires facilities with an welfare of subsistence and other low- future. Accordingly, the requirements of intake flow equal to or greater than 10 income fishermen or minority low- Executive Order 13175 do not apply to MGD to install a recirculating system or income populations. this rule. other technologies that would reduce
VerDate 11
the design intake flow to a level EPA believes that the estimated M. Congressional Review Act commensurate with that of a reduction in available energy supply as The Congressional Review Act, 5 recirculating system. For the purposes a result of the final section 316(b) rule U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small does not constitute a significant energy of this Statement of Energy Effects, EPA Business Regulatory Enforcement effect. During the period covered by believes that facilities that do not Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides EPA’s new facility projection, 2001 to already plan to install a recirculating that before a rule may take effect, the 2020, the Energy Information system in the baseline will install a agency promulgating the rule must Administration (EIA) forecasts total new recirculating wet cooling tower to submit a rule report, which includes a achieve compliance with the rule (9 capacity additions of 370 gigawatts (GW) (1 GW = 1,000 MW) and an copy of the rule, to each House of the power plants). Installation of a cooling Congress and to the Comptroller General tower imposes an ‘‘energy penalty,’’ average available generating capability of 921 GW. Compared to the EIA of the United States. EPA will submit a consisting of two components: (1) A report containing this rule and other reduction in unit efficiency due to forecasts, the estimated energy effect of the final rule is insignificant, required information to the U.S. Senate, increased turbine back-pressure; and (2) the U.S. House of Representatives, and an increase in auxiliary power comprising only 0.03 percent of total new capacity (100 MW/370 GW) and the Comptroller General of the United requirements to operate the States prior to publication of the rule in recirculating wet cooling tower. EPA 0.008 percent of the average available generating capability (74 MW/921 GW) the Federal Register. A major rule estimates that the installation of 9 cannot take effect until 60 days after it recirculating wet cooling towers as a at new facilities. Chapter 9 of the Economic Analysis provides more detail is published in the Federal Register. result of this rule (that is, those installed This action is not considered a ‘‘major at new power plants that would about the estimated energy effect of the final section 316(b) new facility rule. rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This otherwise not utilize recirculating wet rule will be effective January 17, 2002. cooling in absence of the rule) would Chapter 3 of the Technical Development reduce available generating capacity by Document further discusses energy List of Subjects penalty estimation. a maximum of 100 megawatts (MW) 40 CFR Part 9 nationally. EPA also considered the K. National Technology Transfer and energy requirements of other Advancement Act Environmental protection, Reporting compliance technologies, such as and recordkeeping requirements. As noted in the proposed rule, section rotating screens, but found them 40 CFR Part 122 insignificant and thus excluded them 12(d) of the National Technology from this analysis. Transfer and Advancement Act Environmental protection, (NTTAA) of 1995, Pub L. 104–113, Administrative practice and procedure, EPA estimates that 4 new coal-fired section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) Confidential business information, power plants and 5 new combined-cycle directs EPA to use voluntary consensus Hazardous substances, Reporting and power plants will install a recirculating standards in its regulatory activities recordkeeping requirements, Water wet cooling tower to comply with the unless to do so would be inconsistent pollution control. final section 316(b) new facility rule. with applicable law or otherwise The estimated generating capacity of the impractical. Voluntary consensus 40 CFR Part 123 four new coal facilities ranges from 63 standards are technical standards (e.g., Environmental protection, MW to 3,564 MW. Each of the five materials specifications, test methods, Administrative practice and procedure, combined-cycle facilities has a sampling procedures, and business Confidential business information, generating capacity of 1,031 MW. The practices) that are developed or adopted Hazardous substances, Indian-lands, estimated mean annual energy penalty by voluntary consensus standard bodies. Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, is 1.65 percent of the generating The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Reporting and recordkeeping capacity for coal-fired facilities and 0.40 Congress, through the Office of requirements, Water pollution control. percent for combined-cycle facilities. As Management and Budget (OMB), a result, the installation of recirculating explanations when the Agency decides 40 CFR Part 124 wet cooling towers to comply with the not to use available and applicable Environmental protection, final rule is likely to reduce available voluntary consensus standards. Administrative practice and procedure, energy supply by an average of This final rule does not involve Air pollution control, Hazardous waste, approximately 74 MW per year over the technical standards. Therefore, EPA did Indians-lands, Reporting and next 20 years (2001 to 2020). The not consider the use of any voluntary recordkeeping requirements, Water reduction will reach a maximum of 100 consensus standards. pollution control, Water supply. MW in 2017, when all 9 facilities are projected to have begun operation (see L. Plain Language Directive 40 CFR Part 125 Section IV.A.1 of this preamble for Executive Order 12866 requires each Environmental protection, Reporting details on the projected number and agency to write all rules in plain and recordkeeping requirements, Waste cooling water characteristics of new language. EPA has written this final rule treatment and disposal, Water pollution electric generators). These reductions in plain language to make the rule easier control. are actually an overestimate due to the to understand. EPA specifically fact that some facilities may choose to solicited comment on how to make this Dated: November 9, 2001. comply with Track II and implement rule easier to understand. EPA received Christine Todd Whitman, technologies other than recirculating no comments on the plain language of Administrator. wet cooling towers. the proposal or NODA. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Appendix 1 to The Preamble—Section 316(b) New Facility Rule Framework
VerDate 11
Appendix 2 to The Preamble—Illustration of Flow Requirement for Estuaries and Tidal Rivers
VerDate 11
Appendix 3 to The Preamble—Examples of Areas and Volumes Defined in Estuaries or Tidal Rivers By The Tidal Excursion Distance
VerDate 11
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C § 122.21 Application for a permit Construction Technology Plan as For the reasons set forth in the (applicable to State programs, see § 123.25) required in § 125.86(b)(4) of this chapter preamble, chapter I of title 40 of the * * * * * should be revised. This supporting Code of Federal Regulations is amended (r) Applications for facilities with information must include existing data as follows: cooling water intake structures—(1) New (if they are available). However, you facilities with new or modified cooling may supplement the data using newly PART 9—OMB APPROVALS UNDER water intake structures. New facilities conducted field studies if you choose to THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT with cooling water intake structures as do so. The information you submit must defined in part 125, subpart I, of this include: 1. The authority citation for part 9 chapter must report the information (i) A list of the data in paragraphs continues to read as follows: required under paragraphs (r)(2), (3), (r)(4)(ii) through (vi) of this section that Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136–136y; and (4) of this section and § 125.86 of are not available and efforts made to 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601–2671, this chapter. Requests for alternative identify sources of the data; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33 requirements under § 125.85 of this (ii) A list of species (or relevant taxa) U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, chapter must be submitted with your for all life stages and their relative 1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and abundance in the vicinity of the cooling (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, permit application. (2) Source water physical data. These water intake structure; 1971–1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, (iii) Identification of the species and 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g–1, 300g–2, include: 300g–3, 300g–4, 300g–5, 300g–6, 300j–1, (i) A narrative description and scaled life stages that would be most 300j–2, 300j–3, 300j–4, 300j–9, 1857 et seq., drawings showing the physical susceptible to impingement and 6901–6992k, 7401–7671q, 7542, 9601–9657, configuration of all source water bodies entrainment. Species evaluated should 11023, 11048. used by your facility, including areal include the forage base as well as those dimensions, depths, salinity and most important in terms of significance 2. In § 9.1 the table is amended by temperature regimes, and other to commercial and recreational adding entries in numerical order under documentation that supports your fisheries; the indicated heading to read as follows: determination of the water body type (iv) Identification and evaluation of where each cooling water intake the primary period of reproduction, § 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork larval recruitment, and period of peak Reduction Act. structure is located; abundance for relevant taxa; * * * * * (ii) Identification and characterization of the source waterbody’s hydrological (v) Data representative of the seasonal and daily activities (e.g., feeding and OMB and geomorphological features, as well 40 CFR citation Control No. as the methods you used to conduct any water column migration) of biological physical studies to determine your organisms in the vicinity of the cooling intake’s area of influence within the water intake structure; (vi) Identification of all threatened, *****waterbody and the results of such endangered, and other protected species EPA Administered Permit Programs: The studies; and (iii) Locational maps. that might be susceptible to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination impingement and entrainment at your System (3) Cooling water intake structure data. These include: cooling water intake structures; (i) A narrative description of the (vii) Documentation of any public *****configuration of each of your cooling participation or consultation with water intake structures and where it is Federal or State agencies undertaken in 122.21(r) ...... 2040–0241 located in the water body and in the development of the plan; and water column; (viii) If you supplement the (ii) Latitude and longitude in degrees, information requested in paragraph ***** minutes, and seconds for each of your (r)(4)(i) of this section with data Criteria and Standards for the National collected using field studies, supporting Pollutant Discharge Elimination System cooling water intake structures; (iii) A narrative description of the documentation for the Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization *****operation of each of your cooling water 125.86 ...... 2040–0241 intake structures, including design must include a description of all 125.87 ...... 2040–0241 intake flows, daily hours of operation, methods and quality assurance 125.88 ...... 2040–0241 number of days of the year in operation procedures for sampling, and data 125.89 ...... 2040–0241 and seasonal changes, if applicable; analysis including a description of the (iv) A flow distribution and water study area; taxonomic identification of * **** balance diagram that includes all sampled and evaluated biological sources of water to the facility, assemblages (including all life stages of PART 122—EPA ADMINISTERED recirculating flows, and discharges; and fish and shellfish); and sampling and PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE NATIONAL (v) Engineering drawings of the data analysis methods. The sampling POLLUTANT DISCHARGE cooling water intake structure. and/or data analysis methods you use ELIMINATION SYSTEM (4) Source water baseline biological must be appropriate for a quantitative characterization data. This information survey and based on consideration of 1. The authority citation for part 122 is required to characterize the biological methods used in other biological studies continues to read as follows: community in the vicinity of the cooling performed within the same source water body. The study area should include, at Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. water intake structure and to 1251 et seq. characterize the operation of the cooling a minimum, the area of influence of the water intake structures. The Director cooling water intake structure. 2. Section 122.21 is amended by may also use this information in 3. Section 122.44 is amended by adding a new paragraph (r) to read as subsequent permit renewal proceedings adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: to determine if your Design and follows:
VerDate 11
§ 122.44 Establishing limitations, Subpart I—Requirements Applicable to section 510 of the CWA to adopt or standards, and other permit conditions Cooling Water Intake Structures for New enforce any requirement with respect to (applicable to State NPDES programs, see Facilities Under Section 316(b) of the Act control or abatement of pollution that is § 123.25). Sec. more stringent than those required by * * * * * 125.80 What are the purpose and scope of Federal law. (b) * * * this subpart? (3) Requirements applicable to 125.81 Who is subject to this subpart? § 125.81 Who is subject to this subpart? cooling water intake structures at new 125.82 When must I comply with this (a) This subpart applies to a new facilities under section 316(b) of the subpart? facility if it: 125.83 What special definitions apply to (1) Is a point source that uses or CWA, in accordance with part 125, this subpart? subpart I, of this chapter. 125.84 As an owner or operator of a new proposes to use a cooling water intake * * * * * facility, what must I do to comply with structure; this subpart? (2) Has at least one cooling water PART 123—STATE PROGRAM 125.85 May alternative requirements be intake structure that uses at least 25 REQUIREMENTS authorized? percent of the water it withdraws for 125.86 As an owner or operator of a new cooling purposes as specified in 1. The authority citation for part 123 facility, what must I collect and submit paragraph (c) of this section; and continues to read as follows: when I apply for my new or reissued (3) Has a design intake flow greater NPDES permit? than two (2) million gallons per day Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 125.87 As an owner or operator of a new 1251 et seq. facility, must I perform monitoring? (MGD). (b) Use of a cooling water intake 2. Section 123.25 is amended by 125.88 As an owner or operator of a new structure includes obtaining cooling revising paragraph (a)(36) to read as facility, must I keep records and report? water by any sort of contract or follows: 125.89 As the Director, what must I do to comply with the requirements of this arrangement with an independent § 123.25 Requirements for permitting. subpart? supplier (or multiple suppliers) of cooling water if the supplier or (a) * * * Subpart I—Requirements Applicable to (36) Subparts A, B, D, H, and I of part suppliers withdraw(s) water from waters Cooling Water Intake Structures for of the United States. Use of cooling 125 of this chapter; New Facilities Under Section 316(b) of * * * * * water does not include obtaining the Act cooling water from a public water PART 124—PROCEDURES FOR § 125.80 What are the purpose and scope system or the use of treated effluent that DECISIONMAKING of this subpart? otherwise would be discharged to a (a) This subpart establishes water of the U.S. This provision is 1. The authority citation for part 124 requirements that apply to the location, intended to prevent circumvention of continues to read as follows: design, construction, and capacity of these requirements by creating Authority: Resource Conservation and cooling water intake structures at new arrangements to receive cooling water Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.; Safe facilities. The purpose of these from an entity that is not itself a point Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.; requirements is to establish the best source. Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; technology available for minimizing (c) The threshold requirement that at Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. adverse environmental impact least 25 percent of water withdrawn be 2. Section 124.10 is amended by associated with the use of cooling water used for cooling purposes must be redesignating paragraph (d)(1)(ix) as intake structures. These requirements measured on an average monthly basis. paragraph (d)(1)(x) and adding a new are implemented through National A new facility meets the 25 percent paragraph (d)(1)(ix) to read as follows: Pollutant Discharge Elimination System cooling water threshold if, based on the (NPDES) permits issued under section new facility’s design, any monthly § 124.10 Public notice of permit actions average over a year for the percentage of and public comment period. 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). (b) This subpart implements section cooling water withdrawn is expected to * * * * * 316(b) of the CWA for new facilities. equal or exceed 25 percent of the total (d) * * * Section 316(b) of the CWA provides that water withdrawn. (1) * * * (d) This subpart does not apply to (ix) Requirements applicable to any standard established pursuant to sections 301 or 306 of the CWA and facilities that employ cooling water cooling water intake structures at new intake structures in the offshore and facilities under section 316(b) of the applicable to a point source shall require that the location, design, coastal subcategories of the oil and gas CWA, in accordance with part 125, extraction point source category as subpart I, of this chapter. construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best defined under 40 CFR 435.10 and 40 * * * * * technology available for minimizing CFR 435.40. PART 125—CRITERIA AND adverse environmental impact. § 125.82 When must I comply with this STANDARDS FOR THE NATIONAL (c) New facilities that do not meet the subpart? POLLUTANT DISCHARGE threshold requirements regarding You must comply with this subpart ELIMINATION SYSTEM amount of water withdrawn or when an NPDES permit containing percentage of water withdrawn for requirements consistent with this 1. The authority citation for part 125 cooling water purposes in § 125.81(a) subpart is issued to you. continues to read as follows: must meet requirements determined on a case-by-case, best professional § 125.83 What special definitions apply to Authority: The Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. this subpart? 1251 et seq., unless otherwise noted. judgement (BPJ) basis. (d) Nothing in this subpart shall be The following special definitions 2. Remove the existing heading for construed to preclude or deny the right apply to this subpart: subpart I and add new subpart I to part of any State or political subdivision of Annual mean flow means the average 125 to read as follows: a State or any interstate agency under of daily flows over a calendar year.
VerDate 11
Historical data (up to 10 years) must be typically less than 30 parts per thousand meets the definition of a ‘‘new source’’ used where available. (by mass). or ‘‘new discharger’’ in 40 CFR 122.2 Closed-cycle recirculating system Existing facility means any facility and 122.29(b)(1), (2), and (4) and is a means a system designed, using that is not a new facility. greenfield or stand-alone facility; minimized makeup and blowdown Freshwater river or stream means a commences construction after January flows, to withdraw water from a natural lotic (free-flowing) system that does not 17, 2002; and uses either a newly or other water source to support contact receive significant inflows of water from constructed cooling water intake and/or noncontact cooling uses within a oceans or bays due to tidal action. For structure, or an existing cooling water facility. The water is usually sent to a the purposes of this rule, a flow-through intake structure whose design capacity cooling canal or channel, lake, pond, or reservoir with a retention time of 7 days is increased to accommodate the intake tower to allow waste heat to be or less will be considered a freshwater of additional cooling water. New dissipated to the atmosphere and then is river or stream. facilities include only ‘‘greenfield’’ and returned to the system. (Some facilities Hydraulic zone of influence means ‘‘stand-alone’’ facilities. A greenfield divert the waste heat to other process that portion of the source waterbody facility is a facility that is constructed at operations.) New source water (make-up hydraulically affected by the cooling a site at which no other source is water) is added to the system to water intake structure withdrawal of located, or that totally replaces the replenish losses that have occurred due water. process or production equipment at an to blowdown, drift, and evaporation. Impingement means the entrapment existing facility (see 40 CFR Cooling water means water used for of all life stages of fish and shellfish on 122.29(b)(1)(i) and (ii)). A stand-alone contact or noncontact cooling, including the outer part of an intake structure or facility is a new, separate facility that is water used for equipment cooling, against a screening device during constructed on property where an evaporative cooling tower makeup, and periods of intake water withdrawal. existing facility is located and whose dilution of effluent heat content. The Lake or reservoir means any inland processes are substantially independent intended use of the cooling water is to body of open water with some of the existing facility at the same site absorb waste heat rejected from the minimum surface area free of rooted (see 40 CFR 122.29(b)(1)(iii)). New process or processes used, or from vegetation and with an average facility does not include new units that auxiliary operations on the facility’s hydraulic retention time of more than 7 are added to a facility for purposes of premises. Cooling water that is used in days. Lakes or reservoirs might be the same general industrial operation a manufacturing process either before or natural water bodies or impounded (for example, a new peaking unit at an after it is used for cooling is considered streams, usually fresh, surrounded by electrical generating station). process water for the purposes of land or by land and a man-made (1) Examples of ‘‘new facilities’’ calculating the percentage of a new retainer (e.g., a dam). Lakes or reservoirs include, but are not limited to: the facility’s intake flow that is used for might be fed by rivers, streams, springs, following scenarios: cooling purposes in § 125.81(c). and/or local precipitation. Flow-through (i) A new facility is constructed on a Cooling water intake structure means reservoirs with an average hydraulic site that has never been used for the total physical structure and any retention time of 7 days or less should industrial or commercial activity. It has associated constructed waterways used be considered a freshwater river or a new cooling water intake structure for to withdraw cooling water from waters stream. its own use. of the U.S. The cooling water intake Maximize means to increase to the (ii) A facility is demolished and structure extends from the point at greatest amount, extent, or degree another facility is constructed in its which water is withdrawn from the reasonably possible. place. The newly-constructed facility surface water source up to, and Minimum ambient source water uses the original facility’s cooling water including, the intake pumps. surface elevation means the elevation of intake structure, but modifies it to Design intake flow means the value the 7Q10 flow for freshwater streams or increase the design capacity to assigned (during the facility’s design) to rivers; the conservation pool level for accommodate the intake of additional the total volume of water withdrawn lakes or reservoirs; or the mean low cooling water. from a source water body over a specific tidal water level for estuaries or oceans. (iii) A facility is constructed on the time period. The 7Q10 flow is the lowest average 7 same property as an existing facility, but Design intake velocity means the consecutive day low flow with an is a separate and independent industrial value assigned (during the design of a average frequency of one in 10 years operation. The cooling water intake cooling water intake structure) to the determined hydrologically. The structure used by the original facility is average speed at which intake water conservation pool is the minimum modified by constructing a new intake passes through the open area of the depth of water needed in a reservoir to bay for the use of the newly constructed intake screen (or other device) against ensure proper performance of the facility or is otherwise modified to which organisms might be impinged or system relying upon the reservoir. The increase the intake capacity for the new through which they might be entrained. mean low tidal water level is the facility. Entrainment means the incorporation average height of the low water over at (2) Examples of facilities that would of all life stages of fish and shellfish least 19 years. not be considered a ‘‘new facility’’ with intake water flow entering and Minimize means to reduce to the include, but are not limited to, the passing through a cooling water intake smallest amount, extent, or degree following scenarios: structure and into a cooling water reasonably possible. (i) A facility in commercial or system. Natural thermal stratification means industrial operation is modified and Estuary means a semi-enclosed body the naturally-occurring division of a either continues to use its original of water that has a free connection with waterbody into horizontal layers of cooling water intake structure or uses a open seas and within which the differing densities as a result of new or modified cooling water intake seawater is measurably diluted with variations in temperature at different structure. fresh water derived from land drainage. depths. (ii) A facility has an existing intake The salinity of an estuary exceeds 0.5 New facility means any building, structure. Another facility (a separate parts per thousand (by mass) but is structure, facility, or installation that and independent industrial operation),
VerDate 11
is constructed on the same property and the total design intake flow must be no requirements in paragraphs (b)(1), (2), connects to the facility’s cooling water greater than five (5) percent of the and (3) of this section, would contribute intake structure behind the intake source water annual mean flow; unacceptable stress to these species of pumps, and the design capacity of the (ii) For cooling water intake structures concern; cooling water intake structure has not located in a lake or reservoir, the total (6) You must submit the application been increased. This facility would not design intake flow must not disrupt the information required in 40 CFR be considered a ‘‘new facility’’ even if natural thermal stratification or turnover 122.21(r) and § 125.86(b); routine maintenance or repairs that do pattern (where present) of the source (7) You must implement the not increase the design capacity were water except in cases where the monitoring requirements specified in performed on the intake structure. disruption is determined to be § 125.87; Ocean means marine open coastal beneficial to the management of (8) You must implement the record- waters with a salinity greater than or fisheries for fish and shellfish by any keeping requirements specified in equal to 30 parts per thousand (by fishery management agency(ies); § 125.88. mass). (iii) For cooling water intake (c) Track I requirements for new Source water means the water body structures located in an estuary or tidal facilities that withdraw equal to or (waters of the U.S.) from which the river, the total design intake flow over greater than 2 MGD and less than 10 cooling water is withdrawn. one tidal cycle of ebb and flow must be MGD and that choose not to comply Thermocline means the middle layer no greater than one (1) percent of the with paragraph (b) of this section. You of a thermally stratified lake or volume of the water column within the must comply with all the following reservoir. In this layer, there is a rapid area centered about the opening of the requirements: decrease in temperatures. intake with a diameter defined by the (1) You must design and construct Tidal excursion means the horizontal distance of one tidal excursion at the each cooling water intake structure at distance along the estuary or tidal river mean low water level; your facility to a maximum through- that a particle moves during one tidal (4) You must select and implement screen design intake velocity of 0.5 cycle of ebb and flow. design and construction technologies or ft/s; Tidal river means the most seaward operational measures for minimizing (2) You must design and construct reach of a river or stream where the impingement mortality of fish and your cooling water intake structure such salinity is typically less than or equal to shellfish if: that the total design intake flow from all 0.5 parts per thousand (by mass) at a (i) There are threatened or endangered cooling water intake structures at your time of annual low flow and whose or otherwise protected federal, state, or facility meets the following surface elevation responds to the effects tribal species, or critical habitat for requirements: of coastal lunar tides. these species, within the hydraulic zone (i) For cooling water intake structures § 125.84 As an owner or operator of a new of influence of the cooling water intake located in a freshwater river or stream, facility, what must I do to comply with this structure; or the total design intake flow must be no subpart? (ii) There are migratory and/or sport greater than five (5) percent of the (a)(1) The owner or operator of a new or commercial species of impingement source water annual mean flow; facility must comply with either: concern to the Director or any fishery (ii) For cooling water intake structures (i) Track I in paragraph (b) or (c) of management agency(ies), which pass located in a lake or reservoir, the total this section; or through the hydraulic zone of influence design intake flow must not disrupt the (ii) Track II in paragraph (d) of this of the cooling water intake structure; or natural thermal stratification or turnover section. (iii) It is determined by the Director or pattern (where present) of the source (2) In addition to meeting the any fishery management agency(ies) that water except in cases where the requirements in paragraph (b), (c), or (d) the proposed facility, after meeting the disruption is determined to be of this section, the owner or operator of technology-based performance beneficial to the management of a new facility may be required to requirements in paragraphs (b)(1), (2), fisheries for fish and shellfish by any comply with paragraph (e) of this and (3) of this section, would still fishery management agency(ies); section. contribute unacceptable stress to the (iii) For cooling water intake (b) Track I requirements for new protected species, critical habitat of structures located in an estuary or tidal facilities that withdraw equal to or those species, or species of concern; river, the total design intake flow over greater than 10 MGD. You must comply (5) You must select and implement one tidal cycle of ebb and flow must be with all of the following requirements: design and construction technologies or no greater than one (1) percent of the (1) You must reduce your intake flow, operational measures for minimizing volume of the water column within the at a minimum, to a level commensurate entrainment of entrainable life stages of area centered about the opening of the with that which can be attained by a fish and shellfish if: intake with a diameter defined by the closed-cycle recirculating cooling water (i) There are threatened or endangered distance of one tidal excursion at the system; or otherwise protected federal, state, or mean low water level; (2) You must design and construct tribal species, or critical habitat for (3) You must select and implement each cooling water intake structure at these species, within the hydraulic zone design and construction technologies or your facility to a maximum through- of influence of the cooling water intake operational measures for minimizing screen design intake velocity of 0.5 structure; or impingement mortality of fish and ft/s; (ii) There are or would be undesirable shellfish if: (3) You must design and construct cumulative stressors affecting (i) There are threatened or endangered your cooling water intake structure such entrainable life stages of species of or otherwise protected federal, state, or that the total design intake flow from all concern to the Director or any fishery tribal species, or critical habitat for cooling water intake structures at your management agency(ies), and it is these species, within the hydraulic zone facility meets the following determined by the Director or any of influence of the cooling water intake requirements: fishery management agency(ies) that the structure; or (i) For cooling water intake structures proposed facility, after meeting the (ii) There are migratory and/or sport located in a freshwater river or stream, technology-based performance or commercial species of impingement
VerDate 11
concern to the Director or any fishery adverse impact on local water resources (1) There is an applicable requirement management agency(ies), which pass not addressed under paragraph (d)(1)(i) under § 125.84(a) through (e); through the hydraulic zone of influence of this section, or significant adverse (2) The Director determines that data of the cooling water intake structure; or impact on local energy markets, you specific to the facility indicate that (iii) It is determined by the Director or may request alternative requirements compliance with the requirement at any fishery management agency(ies) that under § 125.85. issue would result in compliance costs the proposed facility, after meeting the (2) You must design and construct wholly out of proportion to those EPA technology-based performance your cooling water intake structure such considered in establishing the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) and that the total design intake flow from all requirement at issue or would result in (2) of this section, would still contribute cooling water intake structures at your significant adverse impacts on local air unacceptable stress to the protected facility meet the following quality, significant adverse impacts on species, critical habitat of those species, requirements: local water resources not addressed or species of concern; (i) For cooling water intake structures under § 125.84(d)(1)(i), or significant (4) You must select and implement located in a freshwater river or stream, adverse impacts on local energy design and construction technologies or the total design intake flow must be no markets; operational measures for minimizing greater than five (5) percent of the (3) The alternative requirement entrainment of entrainable life stages of source water annual mean flow; requested is no less stringent than fish and shellfish; (ii) For cooling water intake structures justified by the wholly out of proportion (5) You must submit the application located in a lake or reservoir, the total cost or the significant adverse impacts information required in 40 CFR design intake flow must not disrupt the on local air quality, significant adverse 122.21(r) and § 125.86(b)(2), (3), and (4); natural thermal stratification or turnover impacts on local water resources not (6) You must implement the pattern (where present) of the source addressed under § 125.84(d)(1)(i), or monitoring requirements specified in water except in cases where the significant adverse impacts on local § 125.87; disruption is determined to be energy markets; and (7) You must implement the beneficial to the management of (4) The alternative requirement will recordkeeping requirements specified in fisheries for fish and shellfish by any ensure compliance with other § 125.88. fishery management agency(ies); applicable provisions of the Clean Water (d) Track II. The owner or operator of (iii) For cooling water intake Act and any applicable requirement of a new facility that chooses to comply structures located in an estuary or tidal state law. under Track II must comply with the river, the total design intake flow over (b) The burden is on the person following requirements: one tidal cycle of ebb and flow must be requesting the alternative requirement (1) You must demonstrate to the no greater than one (1) percent of the to demonstrate that alternative Director that the technologies employed volume of the water column within the requirements should be authorized. will reduce the level of adverse area centered about the opening of the environmental impact from your cooling intake with a diameter defined by the § 125.86 As an owner or operator of a new water intake structures to a comparable distance of one tidal excursion at the facility, what must I collect and submit level to that which you would achieve when I apply for my new or reissued NPDES mean low water level. permit? were you to implement the (3) You must submit the application requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) and information required in 40 CFR (a)(1) As an owner or operator of a (2) of this section. 122.21(r) and § 125.86(c). new facility, you must submit to the (i) Except as specified in paragraph (4) You must implement the Director a statement that you intend to (d)(1)(ii) of this section, this monitoring requirements specified in comply with either: demonstration must include a showing § 125.87. (i) The Track I requirements for new that the impacts to fish and shellfish, (5) You must implement the record- facilities that withdraw equal to or including important forage and predator keeping requirements specified in greater than 10 MGD in § 125.84(b); species, within the watershed will be § 125.88. (ii) The Track I requirements for new comparable to those which would result (e) You must comply with any more facilities that withdraw equal to or if you were to implement the stringent requirements relating to the greater than 2 MGD and less than 10 requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) and location, design, construction, and MGD in § 125.84(c); (2) of this section. This showing may capacity of a cooling water intake (iii) The requirements for Track II in include consideration of impacts other structure or monitoring requirements at § 125.84 (d). than impingement mortality and a new facility that the Director deems (2) You must also submit the entrainment, including measures that are reasonably necessary to comply with application information required by 40 will result in increases in fish and any provision of state law, including CFR 122.21(r) and the information shellfish, but it must demonstrate compliance with applicable state water required in either paragraph (b) of this comparable performance for species that quality standards (including designated section for Track I or paragraph (c) of the Director, in consultation with uses, criteria, and antidegradation this section for Track II when you apply national, state or tribal fishery requirements). for a new or reissued NPDES permit in management agencies with accordance with 40 CFR 122.21. responsibility for fisheries potentially § 125.85 May alternative requirements be (b) Track I application requirements. affected by your cooling water intake authorized? To demonstrate compliance with Track structure, identifies as species of (a) Any interested person may request I requirements in § 125.84(b) or (c), you concern. that alternative requirements less must collect and submit to the Director (ii) In cases where air emissions and/ stringent than those specified in the information in paragraphs (b)(1) or energy impacts that would result § 125.84(a) through (e) be imposed in through (4) of this section. from meeting the requirements of the permit. The Director may establish (1) Flow reduction information. If you paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section alternative requirements less stringent must comply with the flow reduction would result in significant adverse than the requirements of § 125.84(a) requirements in § 125.84(b)(1), you must impacts on local air quality, significant through (e) only if: submit the following information to the
VerDate 11
Director to demonstrate that you have description of the water body thermal (C) Design calculations, drawings, and reduced your flow to a level stratification, and any supporting estimates to support the descriptions commensurate with that which can be documentation and engineering provided in paragraphs (b)(4)(iii)(A) and attained by a closed-cycle recirculating calculations to show that the natural (B) of this section. cooling water system: thermal stratification and turnover (c) Application requirements for (i) A narrative description of your pattern will not be disrupted by the total Track II. If you have chosen to comply system that has been designed to reduce design intake flow. In cases where the with the requirements of Track II in your intake flow to a level disruption is determined to be § 125.84(d) you must collect and submit commensurate with that which can be beneficial to the management of the following information: attained by a closed-cycle recirculating fisheries for fish and shellfish you must (1) Source waterbody flow cooling water system and any provide supporting documentation and information. You must submit to the engineering calculations, including include a written concurrence from any Director the following information to documentation demonstrating that your fisheries management agency(ies) with demonstrate that your cooling water make-up and blowdown flows have responsibility for fisheries potentially intake structure meets the source water been minimized; and affected by your cooling water intake body requirements in § 125.84(d)(2): (ii) If the flow reduction requirement structure(s). (i) If your cooling water intake is met entirely, or in part, by reusing or (4) Design and Construction structure is located in a freshwater river recycling water withdrawn for cooling Technology Plan. To comply with or stream, you must provide the annual purposes in subsequent industrial § 125.84(b)(4) and (5), or (c)(3) and mean flow and any supporting processes, you must provide (c)(4), you must submit to the Director documentation and engineering documentation that the amount of the following information in a Design calculations to show that your cooling cooling water that is not reused or and Construction Technology Plan: water intake structure meets the flow recycled has been minimized. (i) Information to demonstrate requirements; (2) Velocity information. You must whether or not you meet the criteria in (ii) If your cooling water intake submit the following information to the § 125.84(b)(4) and (b)(5), or (c)(3) and structure is located in an estuary or tidal Director to demonstrate that you are (c)(4); river, you must provide the mean low complying with the requirement to meet (ii) Delineation of the hydraulic zone water tidal excursion distance and any a maximum through-screen design of influence for your cooling water supporting documentation and intake velocity of no more than 0.5 ft/ intake structure; engineering calculations to show that s at each cooling water intake structure (iii) New facilities required to install your cooling water intake structure as required in § 125.84(b)(2) and (c)(1): design and construction technologies facility meets the flow requirements; (i) A narrative description of the and/or operational measures must and design, structure, equipment, and develop a plan explaining the operation used to meet the velocity (iii) If your cooling water intake technologies and measures you have requirement; and structure is located in a lake or (ii) Design calculations showing that selected based on information collected reservoir, you must provide a narrative the velocity requirement will be met at for the Source Water Biological Baseline description of the water body thermal minimum ambient source water surface Characterization required by 40 CFR stratification, and any supporting elevations (based on best professional 122.21(r)(3). (Examples of appropriate documentation and engineering judgement using available hydrological technologies include, but are not limited calculations to show that the natural data) and maximum head loss across the to, wedgewire screens, fine mesh thermal stratification and thermal or screens or other device. screens, fish handling and return turnover pattern will not be disrupted (3) Source waterbody flow systems, barrier nets, aquatic filter by the total design intake flow. In cases information. You must submit to the barrier systems, etc. Examples of where the disruption is determined to Director the following information to appropriate operational measures be beneficial to the management of demonstrate that your cooling water include, but are not limited to, seasonal fisheries for fish and shellfish you must intake structure meets the flow shutdowns or reductions in flow, provide supporting documentation and requirements in § 125.84(b)(3) and continuous operations of screens, etc.) include a written concurrence from any (c)(2): The plan must contain the following fisheries management agency(ies) with (i) If your cooling water intake information: responsibility for fisheries potentially structure is located in a freshwater river (A) A narrative description of the affected by your cooling water intake or stream, you must provide the annual design and operation of the design and structure(s). mean flow and any supporting construction technologies, including (2) Track II Comprehensive documentation and engineering fish-handling and return systems, that Demonstration Study. You must calculations to show that your cooling you will use to maximize the survival of perform and submit the results of a water intake structure meets the flow those species expected to be most Comprehensive Demonstration Study requirements; susceptible to impingement. Provide (Study). This information is required to (ii) If your cooling water intake species-specific information that characterize the source water baseline in structure is located in an estuary or tidal demonstrates the efficacy of the the vicinity of the cooling water intake river, you must provide the mean low technology; structure(s), characterize operation of water tidal excursion distance and any (B) A narrative description of the the cooling water intake(s), and to supporting documentation and design and operation of the design and confirm that the technology(ies) engineering calculations to show that construction technologies that you will proposed and/or implemented at your your cooling water intake structure use to minimize entrainment of those cooling water intake structure reduce facility meets the flow requirements; species expected to be the most the impacts to fish and shellfish to and susceptible to entrainment. Provide levels comparable to those you would (iii) If your cooling water intake species-specific information that achieve were you to implement the structure is located in a lake or demonstrates the efficacy of the requirements in § 125.84(b)(1)and (2) of reservoir, you must provide a narrative technology; and Track I. To meet the ‘‘comparable level’’
VerDate 11
requirement, you must demonstrate (A) Source Water Biological Study. the cooling water intake structure and/ that: The Source Water Biological Study must or site-specific technology prototype (i) You have reduced both include: studies. impingement mortality and entrainment (1) A taxonomic identification and (C) Evaluation of proposed restoration of all life stages of fish and shellfish to characterization of aquatic biological measures. If you propose to use 90 percent or greater of the reduction resources including: a summary of restoration measures to maintain the that would be achieved through historical and contemporary aquatic fish and shellfish as allowed in § 125.84(b)(1) and (2); or biological resources; determination and § 125.84(d)(1)(i), you must provide the (ii) If your demonstration includes description of the target populations of following information to the Director: consideration of impacts other than concern (those species of fish and (1) Information and data to show that impingement mortality and shellfish and all life stages that are most you have coordinated with the entrainment, that the measures taken susceptible to impingement and appropriate fishery management will maintain the fish and shellfish in entrainment); and a description of the agency(ies); and the waterbody at a substantially similar abundance and temporal/spatial (2) A plan that provides a list of the level to that which would be achieved characterization of the target measures you plan to implement and through § 125.84(b)(1) and (2); and populations based on the collection of how you will demonstrate and continue (iii) You must develop and submit a multiple years of data to capture the to ensure that your restoration measures plan to the Director containing a seasonal and daily activities (e.g., will maintain the fish and shellfish in proposal for how information will be spawning, feeding and water column the waterbody to a substantially similar collected to support the study. The plan migration) of all life stages of fish and level to that which would be achieved must include: shellfish found in the vicinity of the through § 125.84(b)(1) and (2). (A) A description of the proposed cooling water intake structure; (D) Verification monitoring plan. You (2) An identification of all threatened and/or implemented technology(ies) to must include in the Study the following: or endangered species that might be be evaluated in the Study; (1) A plan to conduct, at a minimum, susceptible to impingement and two years of monitoring to verify the (B) A list and description of any entrainment by the proposed cooling full-scale performance of the proposed historical studies characterizing the water intake structure(s); and or implemented technologies, physical and biological conditions in (3) A description of additional operational measures. The verification the vicinity of the proposed or actual chemical, water quality, and other study must begin at the start of intakes and their relevancy to the anthropogenic stresses on the source operations of the cooling water intake proposed Study. If you propose to rely waterbody. structure and continue for a sufficient on existing source water body data, it (B) Evaluation of potential cooling period of time to demonstrate that the must be no more than 5 years old, you water intake structure effects. This facility is reducing the level of must demonstrate that the existing data evaluation will include: impingement and entrainment to the are sufficient to develop a scientifically (1) Calculations of the reduction in level documented in paragraph valid estimate of potential impingement impingement mortality and entrainment (c)(2)(iv)(B) of this section. The plan and entrainment impacts, and provide of all life stages of fish and shellfish that must describe the frequency of documentation showing that the data would need to be achieved by the monitoring and the parameters to be were collected using appropriate quality technologies you have selected to monitored. The Director will use the assurance/quality control procedures; implement to meet requirements under verification monitoring to confirm that (C) Any public participation or Track II. To do this, you must determine you are meeting the level of consultation with Federal or State the reduction in impingement mortality impingement mortality and entrainment agencies undertaken in developing the and entrainment that would be achieved reduction required in § 125.84(d), and plan; and by implementing the requirements of that the operation of the technology has (D) A sampling plan for data that will § 125.84(b)(1) and (2) of Track I at your been optimized. be collected using actual field studies in site. (2) A plan to conduct monitoring to the source water body. The sampling (2) An engineering estimate of efficacy verify that the restoration measures will plan must document all methods and for the proposed and/or implemented maintain the fish and shellfish in the quality assurance procedures for technologies used to minimize waterbody to a substantially similar sampling, and data analysis. The impingement mortality and entrainment level as that which would be achieved sampling and data analysis methods you of all life stages of fish and shellfish and through § 125.84(b)(1) and (2). propose must be appropriate for a maximize survival of impinged life quantitative survey and based on stages of fish and shellfish. You must § 125.87 As an owner or operator of a new consideration of methods used in other demonstrate that the technologies facility, must I perform monitoring? studies performed in the source water reduce impingement mortality and As an owner or operator of a new body. The sampling plan must include entrainment of all life stages of fish and facility, you will be required to perform a description of the study area shellfish to a comparable level to that monitoring to demonstrate your (including the area of influence of the which you would achieve were you to compliance with the requirements cooling water intake structure and at implement the requirements in specified in § 125.84. least 100 meters beyond); taxonomic § 125.84(b)(1) and (2) of Track I. The (a) Biological monitoring. You must identification of the sampled or efficacy projection must include a site- monitor both impingement and evaluated biological assemblages specific evaluation of technology(ies) entrainment of the commercial, (including all life stages of fish and suitability for reducing impingement recreational, and forage base fish and shellfish); and sampling and data mortality and entrainment based on the shellfish species identified in either the analysis methods; and results of the Source Water Biological Source Water Baseline Biological (iv) You must submit documentation Study in paragraph (c)(2)(iv)(A) of this Characterization data required by 40 of the results of the Study to the section. Efficacy estimates may be CFR 122.21(r)(3) or the Comprehensive Director. Documentation of the results determined based on case studies that Demonstration Study required by of the Study must include: have been conducted in the vicinity of § 125.86(c)(2), depending on whether
VerDate 11
you chose to comply with Track I or intake structure is in operation. You proposal plan required by Track II. The monitoring methods used must conduct visual inspections at least § 125.86(c)(2)(iii). The facility may must be consistent with those used for weekly to ensure that any design and initiate sampling and data collection the Source Water Baseline Biological construction technologies required in activities prior to receiving comment Characterization data required in 40 § 125.84(b)(4) and (5), or (c)(3) and (4) from the Director. CFR 122.21(r)(3) or the Comprehensive are maintained and operated to ensure (b) Permitting requirements. Section Demonstration Study required by that they will continue to function as 316(b) requirements are implemented § 125.86(c)(2). You must follow the designed. Alternatively, you must for a facility through an NPDES permit. monitoring frequencies identified below inspect via remote monitoring devices As the Director, you must determine, for at least two (2) years after the initial to ensure that the impingement and based on the information submitted by permit issuance. After that time, the entrainment technologies are the new facility in its permit Director may approve a request for less functioning as designed. application, the appropriate frequent sampling in the remaining requirements and conditions to include years of the permit term and when the § 125.88 As an owner or operator of a new in the permit based on the track (Track facility, must I keep records and report? permit is reissued, if supporting data I or Track II) the new facility has chosen show that less frequent monitoring As an owner or operator of a new to comply with. The following would still allow for the detection of facility you are required to keep records requirements must be included in each any seasonal and daily variations in the and report information and data to the permit: species and numbers of individuals that Director as follows: (1) Cooling water intake structure are impinged or entrained. (a) You must keep records of all the requirements. At a minimum, the permit (1) Impingement sampling. You must data used to complete the permit conditions must include the collect samples to monitor impingement application and show compliance with performance standards that implement rates (simple enumeration) for each the requirements, any supplemental the requirements of § 125.84(b)(1), (2), species over a 24-hour period and no information developed under § 125.86, (3), (4) and (5); § 125.84(c)(1), (2), (3) less than once per month when the and any compliance monitoring data and (4); or § 125.84(d)(1) and (2). In cooling water intake structure is in submitted under § 125.87, for a period determining compliance with operation. of at least three (3) years from the date proportional flow requirement in (2) Entrainment sampling. You must of permit issuance. The Director may §§ 125.84(b)(3)(ii); (c)(2)(ii); and collect samples to monitor entrainment require that these records be kept for a (d)(2)(ii), the director must consider rates (simple enumeration) for each longer period. anthropogenic factors (those not species over a 24-hour period and no (b) You must provide the following to considered ‘‘natural’’) unrelated to the less than biweekly during the primary the Director in a yearly status report: new facility’s cooling water intake period of reproduction, larval (1) Biological monitoring records for structure that can influence the recruitment, and peak abundance each cooling water intake structure as occurrence and location of a identified during the Source Water required by § 125.87(a); thermocline. These include source (2) Velocity and head loss monitoring Baseline Biological Characterization water inflows, other water withdrawals, records for each cooling water intake required by 40 CFR 122.21(r)(3) or the managed water uses, wastewater structure as required by § 125.87(b); and discharges, and flow/level management Comprehensive Demonstration Study (3) Records of visual or remote required in § 125.86(c)(2). You must practices (e.g., some reservoirs release inspections as required in § 125.87(c). collect samples only when the cooling water from below the surface, close to water intake structure is in operation. § 125.89 As the Director, what must I do to the deepest areas). (b) Velocity monitoring. If your comply with the requirements of this (i) For a facility that chooses Track I, facility uses surface intake screen subpart? you must review the Design and systems, you must monitor head loss (a) Permit application. As the Construction Technology Plan required across the screens and correlate the Director, you must review materials in § 125.86(b)(4) to evaluate the measured value with the design intake submitted by the applicant under 40 suitability and feasibility of the velocity. The head loss across the intake CFR 122.21(r)(3) and § 125.86 at the technology proposed to minimize screen must be measured at the time of the initial permit application impingement mortality and entrainment minimum ambient source water surface and before each permit renewal or of all life stages of fish and shellfish. In elevation (best professional judgment reissuance. the first permit issued, you must put a based on available hydrological data). (1) After receiving the initial permit condition requiring the facility to The maximum head loss across the application from the owner or operator reduce impingement mortality and screen for each cooling water intake of a new facility, the Director must entrainment commensurate with the structure must be used to determine determine applicable standards in implementation of the technologies in compliance with the velocity § 125.84 to apply to the new facility. In the permit. Under subsequent permits, requirement in § 125.84(b)(2) or (c)(1). If addition, the Director must review the Director must review the your facility uses devices other than materials to determine compliance with performance of the technologies surface intake screens, you must the applicable standards. implemented and require additional or monitor velocity at the point of entry (2) For each subsequent permit different design and construction through the device. You must monitor renewal, the Director must review the technologies, if needed to minimize head loss or velocity during initial application materials and monitoring impingement mortality and entrainment facility startup, and thereafter, at the data to determine whether of all life stages of fish and shellfish. In frequency specified in your NPDES requirements, or additional addition, you must consider whether permit, but no less than once per requirements, for design and more stringent conditions are quarter. construction technologies or operational reasonably necessary in accordance (c) Visual or remote inspections. You measures should be included in the with § 125.84(e). must either conduct visual inspections permit. (ii) For a facility that chooses Track II, or employ remote monitoring devices (3) For Track II facilities, the Director you must review the information during the period the cooling water may review the information collection submitted with the Comprehensive
VerDate 11
Demonstration Study information § 125.84(b)(1) and (2). In addition, you (2) Monitoring conditions. At a required in § 125.86(c)(2), evaluate the must review the Verification Monitoring minimum, the permit must require the suitability of the proposed design and Plan in § 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(D) and require permittee to perform the monitoring construction technologies and that the proposed monitoring begin at required in § 125.87. You may modify operational measures to determine the start of operations of the cooling the monitoring program when the whether they will reduce both water intake structure and continue for permit is reissued and during the term impingement mortality and entrainment a sufficient period of time to of the permit based on changes in of all life stages of fish and shellfish to demonstrate that the technologies, physical or biological conditions in the 90 percent or greater of the reduction operational measures and restoration vicinity of the cooling water intake that could be achieved through Track I. measures meet the requirements in structure. The Director may require If you determine that restoration § 125.84(d)(1). Under subsequent continued monitoring based on the measures are appropriate at the new facility for consideration of impacts permits, the Director must review the results of the Verification Monitoring other than impingement mortality and performance of the additional and /or Plan in § 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(D). entrainment, you must review the different technologies or measures used (3) Record keeping and reporting. At Evaluation of Proposed Restoration and determine that they reduce the level a minimum, the permit must require the Measures and evaluate whether the of adverse environmental impact from permittee to report and keep records as proposed measures will maintain the the cooling water intake structures to a required by § 125.88. fish and shellfish in the waterbody at a comparable level that the facility would [FR Doc. 01–28968 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] substantially similar level to that which achieve were it to implement the would be achieved through requirements of § 125.84(b)(1) and (2). BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Part III
Department of Defense General Services Administration National Aeronautics and Space Administration 48 CFR Chapter 1 et al. Federal Acquisition Circular 2001-02; Introduction and Federal Acquisition Regulation; Energy-Efficiency of Supplies and Services and Prompt Payment and the Recovery of Overpayment, et al.; Final Rules
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ACTION: Summary presentation of final DATES: For effective dates and comment rules. dates, see separate documents that GENERAL SERVICES follow. ADMINISTRATION SUMMARY: This document summarizes FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Federal Acquisition Regulation The FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND (FAR) rules agreed to by the Civilian Building, Washington, DC 20405, (202) SPACE ADMINISTRATION Agency Acquisition Council and the 501–4755, for information pertaining to Defense Acquisition Regulations 48 CFR Chapter 1 status or publication schedules. Council in this Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2001–02. A companion For clarification of content, contact Federal Acquisition Circular 2001–02; the analyst whose name appears in the Introduction document, the Small Entity Compliance Guide (SECG), follows this FAC. The table below in relation to each FAR case AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), FAC, including the SECG, is available or subject area. Please cite FAC 2001– General ServicesAdministration (GSA), 02 and specific FAR case number(s). via the Internet at http://www.arnet.gov/ and National Aeronautics and Space Interested parties may also visit our web far. Administration (NASA). site at http://www.arnet.gov/far.
Item Subject FAR case Analyst
I Definitions of ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End Product’’ ...... 2000–015 Davis II Energy Efficiency of Supplies and Services ...... 1999–011 Smith III Prompt Payment and the Recovery of Overpayment ...... 1999–023 Olson IV Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act Subcontract Preference Under Service Contracts ...... 1999–017 Nelson V Discussion Requirements ...... 1999–022 DeStefano VI Definition of Subcontract in FAR Subpart 15.4 ...... 2000–017 Olson VII North American Industry Classification System ...... 2000–604 Cundiff VIII Iceland—Newly Designated Country under Trade Agreements Act ...... 2001–025 Davis IX Contractor Personnel in the Procurement of Information Technology Services ...... 2000–609 Nelson
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information on ENERGY STAR and officer if the contractor becomes aware Summaries for each FAR rule follow. other energy-efficient products; and of an overpayment of an invoice; and For the actual revisions and/or • Provides guidance on energy- • All Government contracts amendments to these FAR cases, refer to savings performance contracts (ESPCs), (including contracts at or below the the specific item number and subject set including— simplified acquisition threshold) except forth in the documents following these • An explanation of what they are contracts with payment terms and late item summaries. FAC 2001–02 amends and when they should be used; and payment penalties established by other the FAR as specified below: • Procedures for the solicitation and governmental authority (e.g., tariffs). award of ESPCs, and the evaluation of Item I—Definitions of ‘‘Component’’ Item IV—Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act unsolicited proposals for ESPCs. and ‘‘End Product’’ (FAR Case 2000– Subcontract Preference under Service The rule will only affect contracting 015) Contracts (FAR Case 1999–017) officers that— This final rule amends the FAR to • Acquire energy-using products or This final rule amends the FAR to add restore the unique Part 25 definitions of services; a new preference for award of ‘‘component’’ and ‘‘end product’’ for • Contract for design, construction, subcontracts under service contracts to acquisition of supplies. In addition, the renovation, or maintenance of a public nonprofit workshops designated by the Councils have made minor revisions to building that will include energy-using Committee for Purchase From People the definitions of ‘‘component’’ and products; or Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled ‘‘cost of components’’ for acquisition of • Use an energy-savings performance (Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 construction. These definitions are used contract to reduce energy use and cost U.S.C. 48)). The final rule applies to all by offerors to determine whether offered in an agency’s facilities or operations. service contracts. The rule— • Requires that contractors that end products or construction material Item III—Prompt Payment and the meet the requirements of the Buy provide services for the Government’s Recovery of Overpayment (FAR Case use and subcontract for those services American Act and Balance of Payments 1999–023) Program or trade agreements. must give preference in awarding This final rule revises prompt subcontracts to nonprofit workshops, if Item II—Energy Efficiency of Supplies payment policies at FAR part 32, the services are on the Committee for and Services (FAR Case 1999–011) Contract Financing, and related contract Purchase From People Who Are Blind provisions at FAR part 52. The rule is This final rule amends the FAR to or Severely Disabled procurement list; applicable to— • Requires that contracting officers implement Executive Order 13123, • Government payment offices and must consider the preference for Greening the Government through contractors since it revises the subcontracting with nonprofit Efficient Energy Management. The information that must be on an invoice workshops when reviewing a rule— for the document to be considered a subcontract for services that is subject to • Requires contracting officers, when proper invoice with respect to the the procedures at FAR Subpart 44.2, acquiring energy-using products, to buy prompt payment provisions of the FAR; Consent to Subcontracts; and energy-efficient products if life-cycle • Contracting officers and contractors • Amends the clause at FAR 52.208– cost-effective and available; since it establishes the requirement in 9, Contractor Use of Mandatory Sources • Directs contracting officers to the prompt payment clauses for of Supply, to inform offerors and Internet sources for more detailed contractors to notify the contracting contractors that certain services to be
VerDate 11
provided for use by the Government are countries under the Trade Agreements Dated: December 5, 2001. required by law to be obtained from the Act (TAA). Contracting officers may Carolyn M. Balven, Committee for Purchase From People now consider offers of end products or Deputy Director, Defense Procurement. Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. construction materials from Iceland in Patricia A. Brooks, Item V—Discussion Requirements (FAR acquisitions subject to the TAA. The Acting Deputy Associate Administrator, Case 1999–022) current TAA threshold for acquisition of Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services supplies is $177,000 and for acquisition Administration. The rule amends FAR 15.306(d) to of construction is $6,806,000. Tom Luedtke, clarify that, although the contracting Associate Administrator for Procurement, officer must discuss deficiencies, In addition, if the TAA applies, Executive Order 13126 of June 12, 1999, National Aeronautics and Space significant weaknesses, and adverse past Administration. Prohibition of Acquisition of Products performance information to which the [FR Doc. 01–30537 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] offeror has not yet had an opportunity Produced by Forced or Indentured Child BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P to respond and is encouraged to discuss Labor, does not apply to contracts for other aspects of the offeror’s proposal, the acquisition of products from foreign the contracting officer is not required to countries that are party to the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE discuss every area where the proposal Agreement on Government could be improved. This clarifies the Procurement. Therefore, this final rule GENERAL SERVICES existing policy that any discussions also adds Iceland to the list of excepted ADMINISTRATION beyond the minimum elements stated in countries of origin at 22.1503(b)(4) and the FAR are a matter of contracting the associated clause at 52.222–19, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND officer judgment. Child Labor—Cooperation with SPACE ADMINISTRATION Item VI—Definition of Subcontract in Authorities and Remedies. 48 CFR Parts 2, 25, and 52 FAR Subpart 15.4 (FAR Case 2000–017) Item IX—Contractor Personnel in the This final rule amends FAR 15.401 to Procurement of Information [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 2000–015; exclude section 15.407–2, Make-or-buy Technology Services (FAR Case 2000– Item I] programs, from application of the 609) RIN 9000–AJ24 expanded definition of ‘‘subcontract’’ at This final rule converts the interim FAR 15.401. This rule is a clarification Federal Acquisition Regulation; rule published in FAC 97–25, in the and does not change any policy in Definitions of ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End Federal Register at 66 FR 22084, May 2, Subpart 15.4, Contract Pricing. Product’’ 2001, to a final rule without change. The Item VII—North American Industry rule added a new section to subpart 39.1 AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), Classification System (FAR Case 2000– to implement section 813 of the Floyd General ServicesAdministration (GSA), 604) D. Spence National Defense and National Aeronautics and Space This rule finalizes, with minor Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 Administration (NASA). changes, the interim rule which (Pub. L. 106–398). Section 813 prohibits ACTION: Final rule. amended the FAR to convert size the use of minimum experience or standards and other programs in the education requirements for contractor SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency FAR that were based on the Standard personnel in solicitations for the Acquisition Council and the Defense Industrial Classification (SIC) system to acquisition of information technology Acquisition Regulations Council the North American Industry services, unless (1) the contracting (Councils) have agreed on a final rule Classification System (NAICS). NAICS officer first determines that the needs of amending the Federal Acquisition is a new system that classifies the agency cannot be met without such Regulation (FAR) to restore the unique establishments according to how they requirement; or (2) the needs of the (Part 25) definitions of ‘‘component’’ conduct their economic activity. It is a agency require the use of a type of and ‘‘end product’’ for acquisition of significant improvement over the SIC contract other than a performance-based supplies. In addition, the Councils have system because it more accurately contract. made minor revisions to the definitions identifies industries. Since October 1, of ‘‘component’’ and ‘‘cost of 2000, NAICS is to be used to establish Dated: December 5, 2001. components’’ for acquisition of the size standards for acquisitions. In Al Matera, construction. addition, the designated industry groups Director, Acquisition Policy Division. DATES: Effective Date: February 19, in FAR 19.1005 have been converted to Federal Acquisition Circular 2002. NAICS and contract actions will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The reported using the NAICS code rather Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) than the SIC code. FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS 2001–02 is issued under the authority of Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) Item VIII—Iceland Newly Designated the Secretary of Defense, the 501–4755, for information pertaining to Country under Trade Agreements Act Administrator of General Services, and status or publication schedules. For (FAR Case 2001–025) the Administrator for the National clarification of content, contact Ms. This final rule amends the definition Aeronautics and Space Administration. Cecelia L. Davis, Procurement Analyst, of ‘‘Designated country’’ at FAR 25.003, Unless otherwise specified, all at (202) 219–0202. Please cite FAC and the clause at 52.225–5, Trade Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2001–02, FAR case 2000–015. Agreements, and the clause at 52.225– and other directive material contained SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 11, Buy American Act—Balance of in FAC 2001–02 is effective February Payments Program—Construction 19, 2002, except for Items VII through A. Background Materials under Trade Agreements, to IX, which are effective December 18, This final rule restores unique add Iceland to the list of designated 2001. definitions of ‘‘component’’ and ‘‘end
VerDate 11
product’’ at FAR 25.003, and amends FAR do not impose information directly into an end product or the definitions at FAR 2.101 and collection requirements that require the construction material. associated clauses 52.225–1, Buy approval of the Office of Management * * * * * American Act—Balance of Payments and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et End product means those articles, Program—Supplies; 52.225–3, Buy seq. materials, and supplies to be acquired American Act—North American Free List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 2, 25, for public use. Trade Agreement—Israeli Trade Act— * * * * * Balance of Payments Program; and and 52 52.225–5, Trade Agreements, to comply Government procurement. PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS with these definitions. The final rule Dated: December 5, 2001. AND CONTRACT CLAUSES under FAR case 97–024, Foreign Al Matera, Acquisition (Part 25 Rewrite), published 4. Amend section 52.225–1 by in the Federal Register at 64 FR 72416, Director, Acquisition Policy Division. revising the date of the clause and the December 27, 1999, removed the unique Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA definitions ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End Part 25 definitions of ‘‘component’’ and amend 48 CFR parts 2, 25, and 52 as set product’’ to read as follows: ‘‘end product,’’ applying standard forth below: definitions in Part 2 to Part 25 and 52.225–1 Buy American Act—Balance of 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Payments Program—Supplies. associated clauses (other than clauses parts 2, 25, and 52 continues to read as * * * * * for construction). The Councils did not follows: intend to make any substantive change Buy American Act—Balance of Payments to the FAR by these amendments. Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Program—Supplies (Feb 2002) Because the Councils received chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). (a) * * * comments addressing potential Component means an article, material, or PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS supply incorporated directly into an end unintended substantive changes to the AND TERMS FAR that might result from these product. amendments, the Councils are reverting 2. Amend section 2.101 by revising * * * * * to the original definitions, with minor End product means those articles, the definitions ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End materials, and supplies to be acquired under editorial corrections. product’’ to read as follows: In addition, this rule revises the the contract for public use. definition of ‘‘components’’ in FAR 2.101 Definitions. * * * * * clauses 52.225–9, Buy American Act— * * * * * 5. Amend section 52.225–3 by Balance of Payments Program— Component means any item supplied revising the date of the clause and the Construction Materials, and 52.225–11, to the Government as part of an end definitions ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End Buy American Act—Balance of item or of another component, except product’’ to read as follows: Payments Program—Construction that for use in— Materials under Trade Agreements, to a 52.225–3 Buy American Act—North (1) Part 25, see the definition in American Free Trade Agreement—Israeli definition of the singular term 25.003; Trade Act—Balance of Payments Program. ‘‘component’’ and revises the definition (2) 52.225–1 and 52.225–3, see the of ‘‘cost of components’’ in these clauses * * * * * definition in 52.225–1(a) and 52.225– Buy American Act—North American Free to address components of construction 3(a); and material, rather than components of an Trade Agreement—Israeli Trade Act— (3) 52.225–9 and 52.225–11, see the end product (which is not applicable to Balance of Payments Program (Feb 2002) definition in 52.225–9(a) and 52.225– construction). 11(a). (a) * * * This is not a significant regulatory Component means an article, action, and therefore, was not subject to * * * * * material, or supply incorporated review under section 6(b) of Executive End product means supplies directly into an end product. Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and delivered under a line item of a Government contract, except for use in * * * * * Review, dated September 30, 1993. This End product means those articles, part 25 and the associated clauses at rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. materials, and supplies to be acquired 52.225–1, 52.225–3, and 52.225–5, see 804. under the contract for public use. the definitions in 25.003, 52.225–1(a), B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 52.225–3(a), and 52.225–5(a). * * * * * The final rule does not constitute a * * * * * 6. Amend section 52.225–5 by significant FAR revision within the revising the date of the clause and the meaning of FAR 1.501 and Public Law PART 25—FOREIGN ACQUISITION definition ‘‘End product’’ to read as 98–577, and publication for public follows: comments is not required. However, the 3. In section 25.003 add, in 52.225–5 Trade Agreements. Councils will consider comments from alphabetical order, the definitions small entities concerning the affected ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End product’’; and * * * * * FAR parts 2, 25, and 52 in accordance amend paragraph (1) of the definition Trade Agreements (Feb 2002) with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties ‘‘Cost of components’’ by removing ‘‘product’’ and adding ‘‘product or (a) * * * must submit such comments separately End product means those articles, construction material’’ in its place. The and should cite 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. materials, and supplies to be acquired added text reads as follows: (FAC 2001–02, FAR case 2000–015), in under the contract for public use. correspondence. 25.003 Definitions. * * * * * C. Paperwork Reduction Act * * * * * 7. Amend section 52.225–9 by The Paperwork Reduction Act does Component means an article, revising the date of the clause and the not apply because the changes to the material, or supply incorporated definition ‘‘Component’’; and by
VerDate 11
amending the definition ‘‘Cost of Acquisition Regulations Council a. Provides additional emphasis on components’’ in paragraph (1) by (Councils) have agreed on a final rule water conservation at FAR 11.002(d)(2), removing ‘‘end product’’ and adding amending the Federal Acquisition 23.000(d), and 23.703; ‘‘construction material’’ in its place. The Regulation (FAR) to implement b. Deletes E.O. 12902 of March 8, revised text reads as follows: Executive Order (E.O.) 13123 of June 3, 1994, Energy Efficiency and Water 1999, Greening the Government through Conservation at Federal Facilities, at 52.225–9 Buy American Act—Balance of Efficient Energy Management. Payments Program—Construction FAR 23.702(e) since this E.O. was Materials. DATES: Effective Date: February 19, revoked by Section 604 of E.O. 13123; and * * * * * 2002. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The c. Revises 42.302(a)(68) to better Buy American Act—Balance of Payments reflect the current practices of the Program—Construction Materials (Feb 2002) FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) contract administration office. (a) * * * 501–4755, for information pertaining to This is not a significant regulatory Component means an article, status or publication schedules. For action, and therefore, was not subject to material, or supply incorporated clarification of content, contact Ms. review under Section 6(b) of Executive directly into a construction material. Laura Smith, Procurement Analyst, at Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and * * * * * (202) 208–7279. Please cite FAC 2001– Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 8. Amend section 52.225–11 by 02, FAR case 1999–011. 804. revising the date of the clause and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: definition ‘‘Component’’; and by B. Regulatory Flexibility Act A. Background amending the definition ‘‘Cost of The Department of Defense, the components’’ in paragraph (1) by DoD, GSA, and NASA published a General Services Administration, and removing ‘‘end product’’ and adding proposed rule in the Federal Register at the National Aeronautics and Space ‘‘construction material’’ in its place. The 65 FR 30310, May 10, 2000. The Administration certify that this final revised text reads as follows: proposed rule— 1. Defined in Subpart 2.1, rule will not have a significant 52.225–11 Buy American Act—Balance of Definitions— economic impact on a substantial Payments Program—Construction Materials a. ‘‘Energy-efficient product’’ number of small entities within the under Trade Agreements. (relocated and revised from FAR meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility * * * * * 23.704); Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because this Buy American Act—Balance of Payments b. ‘‘Energy-savings performance rule simply provides additional Program—Construction Materials Under contract’’ (ESPC); and guidance to Government contracting Trade Agreements (Feb 2002) c. ‘‘Renewable energy’’ and and technical personnel with respect to the Government’s preference, currently (a) * * * ‘‘renewable energy technology’’; 2. Revised the policies and sources of set forth in FAR Subpart 23.7, for Component means an article, authority in Part 11; buying environmentally preferable and material, or supply incorporated 3. Revised Part 15 to alert agencies to energy-efficient products and services. directly into a construction material. the special procedures at 10 CFR This rule requires a contracting officer, * * * * * 436.33(b) that agencies must use when when acquiring an energy-using [FR Doc. 01–30538 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] evaluating unsolicited proposals for product, to purchase an energy-efficient BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P ESPCs; product (where life-cycle cost-effective 4. Revised and relocated guidance on and available), i.e., a product that is in energy-efficient products and services the upper 25 percent of energy DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE from Subpart 23.7 to Subpart 23.2 so efficiency as designated by the that Subpart 23.7 would focus on Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Federal GENERAL SERVICES environmentally preferably products Energy Management Program or that ADMINISTRATION and services; meets DOE and Environmental 5. Revised Subpart 23.2 by— Protection Agency (EPA) criteria for use NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND a. Renaming the subpart ‘‘Energy and of the ‘‘ENERGY STAR’’ trademark SPACE ADMINISTRATION Water Efficiency and Renewable label. The 25 percent benchmark for Energy’’ to reflect its expanded subject determining energy efficiency is 48 CFR Parts 2, 11, 15, 23, and 42 area; currently addressed at FAR 23.704. [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 1999–011; Item b. Deleting outdated definitions and Small entities that offer products to the II] guidance; Government may use the ENERGY c. Adding guidance on energy- and STAR label, if the product meets DOE RIN 9000–AI71 water-efficient products (e.g., ENERGY and EPA criteria. The rule also provides Federal Acquisition Regulation; STAR ) and services, and ESPCs; and guidance to contracting officers on the Energy-Efficiency of Supplies and d. Directing contracting officers to use of energy-savings performance Services sources for more detailed guidance and contracts as alternatives to the information; and traditional method of financing energy AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 6. Made a number of editorial efficiency improvements. changes. Seven respondents submitted General Services Administration (GSA), C. Paperwork Reduction Act and National Aeronautics and Space public comments on the proposed rule. Administration (NASA). The Councils considered all comments The Paperwork Reduction Act does ACTION: Final rule. when developing this final rule. The not apply because the changes to the major changes between the final rule FAR do not impose information SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency and the proposed rule are that the final collection requirements that require the Acquisition Council and the Defense rule— approval of the Office of Management
VerDate 11
and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et Renewable energy technology preferable, energy- and water-efficient seq. means— products, and renewable energy (1) Technologies that use renewable technologies (see subparts 23.2, 23.4, List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 2, 11, energy to provide light, heat, cooling, or and 23.7). 15, 23, and 42 mechanical or electrical energy for use * * * * * Government procurement. in facilities or other activities; or Dated: December 5, 2001. (2) The use of integrated whole- PART 15—CONTRACTING BY Al Matera, building designs that rely upon NEGOTIATION renewable energy resources, including Director, Acquisition Policy Division. 5. In section 15.603, add paragraph (e) passive solar design. Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA to read as follows: * * * * * amend 48 CFR parts 2, 11, 15, 23, and 15.603 General. 42 as set forth below: PART 11—DESCRIBING AGENCY * * * * * 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR NEEDS (e) Agencies must evaluate parts 2, 11, 15, 23, and 42 continues to unsolicited proposals for energy-savings read as follows: 3. In section 11.002, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows: performance contracts in accordance Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. with the procedures in 10 CFR chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). 11.002 Policy. 436.33(b). * * * * * PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS PART 23—ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY (d)(1) The Resource Conservation and AND TERMS AND WATER EFFICIENCY, Recovery Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6901, RENEWABLEENERGY 2. In section 2.101, revise the et seq.), Executive Order 13101 of TECHNOLOGIES, OCCUPATIONAL definition ‘‘Energy-efficient product,’’ September 14, 1998, Greening the SAFETY, AND DRUG- and add, in alphabetical order, the Government through Waste Prevention, FREEWORKPLACE definitions, ‘‘Energy-savings Recycling, and Federal Acquisition, and performance contract,’’ ‘‘Renewable Executive Order 13123 of June 3, 1999, 6. Revise the heading of Part 23 to energy,’’ and ‘‘Renewable energy Greening the Government through read as set forth above. technology’’ to read as follows: Efficient Energy Management, establish 7. Revise the heading and text of requirements for acquiring 2.101 Definitions. section 23.000 to read as follows: (i) Products containing recovered * * * * * materials; 23.000 Scope. Energy-efficient product means a (ii) Environmentally preferable This part prescribes acquisition product that— products and services; policies and procedures supporting the (1) Meets Department of Energy and (iii) Energy-efficient products and Government’s program for ensuring a Environmental Protection Agency services; and drug-free workplace and for protecting criteria for use of the Energy Star (iv) Products and services that utilize and improving the quality of the trademark label; or renewable energy technologies. environment by (2) Is in the upper 25 percent of (2) Executive agencies must consider (a) Controlling pollution; efficiency for all similar products as use of recovered materials, energy- and (b) Managing energy and water use in designated by the Department of water-efficient products and services, Government facilities efficiently; Energy’s Federal Energy Management environmentally preferable purchasing (c) Using renewable energy and Program. criteria developed by the EPA, and renewable energy technologies; Energy-savings performance contract environmental objectives (see subparts (d) Acquiring energy- and water- means a contract that requires the 23.2 and 23.4 and 23.703(b)) when efficient products and services, contractor to— (i) Developing, reviewing, or revising environmentally preferable products, (1) Perform services for the design, Federal and military specifications, and products that use recovered acquisition, financing, installation, product descriptions (including materials; and testing, operation, and where commercial item descriptions) and (e) Requiring contractors to identify appropriate, maintenance and repair, of standards; hazardous materials. an identified energy conservation (ii) Describing Government 8. Revise the heading and text of measure or series of measures at one or requirements for supplies and services; Subpart 23.2 to read as follows: more locations; and (2) Incur the costs of implementing (iii) Developing source-selection Subpart 23.2—Energy and Water Efficiency the energy savings measures, including factors. and Renewable Energy at least the cost (if any) incurred in * * * * * Sec. making energy audits, acquiring and 4. In section 11.101, revise paragraph 23.200 Scope. installing equipment, and training 23.201 Authorities. (b) to read as follows: personnel in exchange for a 23.202 Policy. predetermined share of the value of the 11.101 Order of precedence for 23.203 Energy-efficient products. energy savings directly resulting from requirements documents. 23.204 Energy-savings performance contracts. implementation of such measures * * * * * during the term of the contract; and (b) Agencies must prepare 23.200 Scope. (3) Guarantee future energy and cost requirements documents to achieve (a) This subpart prescribes policies savings to the Government. maximum practicable— and procedures for— * * * * * (1) Energy efficiency, including using (1) Acquiring energy- and water- Renewable energy means energy renewable energy technologies; and efficient products and services, and produced by solar, wind, geothermal, (2) Use of recovered material, other products that use renewable energy and biomass power. materials that are environmentally technology; and
VerDate 11
(2) Using an energy-savings provided in the National Energy (b) * * * performance contract to obtain energy- Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. (2) Promote energy-efficiency and efficient technologies at Government 8287) to use an energy-savings water conservation. facilities without Government capital performance contract (ESPC), when life- * * * * * expense. cycle cost-effective, to reduce energy (b) This subpart applies to use and cost in the agency’s facilities PART 42—CONTRACT acquisitions in the UnitedStates, its and operations. ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT possessions and territories, Puerto Rico, (b)(1) Under an ESPC, an agency can SERVICES and the Northern Mariana Islands. contract with an energy service Agencies conducting acquisitions company for a period not to exceed 25 13. In section 42.302, revise paragraph outside of these areas must use their years to improve energy efficiency in (a)(68) to read as follows: best efforts to comply with this subpart. one or more agency facilities at no direct 42.302 Contract administration functions. capital cost to the United States 23.201 Authorities. (a) * * * Treasury. The energy service company (a) Energy Policy and Conservation (68) Monitor the contractor’s finances the capital costs of environmental practices for adverse Act (42 U.S.C. implementing energy conservation 6361(a)(1)) and Resource impact on contract performance or measures and receives, in return, a contract cost, and for compliance with Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 contractually determined share of the (42 U.S.C. 6901, et seq.). environmental requirements specified cost savings that result. in the contract. ACO responsibilities (b) National Energy Conservation (2) Except as provided in 10 CFR Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 8253, 8262g, and include— 436.34, ESPC’s are subject to subpart (i) Requesting environmental 8287). 17.1. (c) Executive Order 11912 of April 13, technical assistance, if needed; (c) To solicit and award an ESPC, the 1976, Delegations of Authority under (ii) Monitoring contractor compliance contracting officer— the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. with specifications requiring the use of (1) Must use the procedures, selection (d) Executive Order 13123 of June 3, environmentally preferable products, method, and terms and conditions 1999, Greening the Government through energy-efficient products, and materials provided in 10 CFR part 436, subpart B; Efficient Energy Management. or delivery of end products with at http://www.eren.doe.gov/femp/ specified recovered material content. 23.202 Policy. resources/legislation.html; and This must occur as part of the quality The Government’s policy is to acquire (2) May use the ‘‘Qualified List’’ of assurance procedures set forth in Part supplies and services that promote energy service companies established by 46; and energy and water efficiency, advance the Department of Energy and other (iii) As required in the contract, the use of renewable energy products, agencies. ensuring that the contractor complies and help foster markets for emerging Subpart 23.7—Contracting for with the reporting requirements relating technologies. This policy extends to all Environmentally Preferable Products to recovered material content utilized in acquisitions, including those below the and Services contract performance (see subpart 23.4). simplified acquisition threshold. * * * * * 23.203 Energy-efficient products. 9. Revise the heading of subpart 23.7 [FR Doc. 01–30539 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] to read as set forth above. (a) If life-cycle cost-effective and BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P available— 10. Revise section 23.700 to read as (1) When acquiring energy-using follows: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE products, contracting officers must 23.700 Scope. purchase ENERGY STAR or other This subpart prescribes policies for GENERAL SERVICES energy-efficient products designated by acquiring environmentally preferable ADMINISTRATION the Department of Energy’sFederal products and services. Energy Management Program (FEMP); or NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND (2) When contracting for services that 11. Amend section 23.702 by SPACE ADMINISTRATION will include the provision of energy- removing paragraph (e), redesignating (f) using products, including contracts for as (e), and adding a new paragraph (f) 48 CFR Parts 2, 32, and 52 design, construction, renovation, or to read as follows: maintenance of a public building, the 23.702 Authorities. [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 1999–023; Item specifications must require that the III] * * * * * contractor provide ENERGY STAR or (f) Executive Order 13123 of June 3, RIN 9000–AI89 other energy-efficient products. 1999, Greening the Government through (b) Information is available via the Efficient Energy Management. Federal Acquisition Regulation; Internet on— Prompt Payment and the Recovery of (1) ENERGY STAR at http:// 12. Amend section 23.703 by revising Overpayment www.energystar.gov/; and paragraphs (a) and (b)(2) to read as (2) FEMP at http://www.eren.doe.gov/ follows: AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), femp/procurement. General ServicesAdministration (GSA), 23.703 Policy and National Aeronautics and Space 23.204 Energy-savings performance * * * * * Administration (NASA). contracts. (a) Implement cost-effective ACTION: Final rule. (a) Section 403 of Executive Order contracting preference programs 13123 of June 3, 1999, Greening the promoting energy-efficiency, water SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Government through Efficient conservation, and the acquisition of Acquisition Council and the Defense EnergyManagement, requires an agency environmentally preferable products Acquisition Regulations Council to make maximum use of the authority and services; and (Councils) have agreed on a final rule
VerDate 11
amending the Federal Acquisition invoice payments, and expand the contractors to notify the contracting Regulation (FAR) to reflect changes to coverage to include financing payments officer if the contractor becomes aware the Office of Management and Budget (e.g., progress payments based on cost). that the Government has overpaid on an (OMB) prompt payment requirements, The Councils agree with this comment invoice payment. The FAR Secretariat to simplify and clarify the prompt and have opened a new FAR case submitted a request for approval of a payment coverage currently in the FAR, (reference FAR case 2001–005), to revised information collection, and the to require the contractor to notify the consider adding the requirement to collection was approved by the Office of contracting officer if the contractor notify the contracting officer of a Management and Budget under OMB becomes aware of an overpayment, and duplicate payment or overpayment to Control Number 9000–0070. to write all new and revised text using the financing payment clauses (e.g., List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 2, 32, plain language. FAR 52.216–7, Allowable Cost and and 52 DATES: Effective Date: February 19, Payment; 52.216–13, Allowable Cost 2002. and Payment-Facilities; 52.232–7, Government procurement. Payments under Time-and-Material and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Dated: December 15, 2001. Labor-Hour Contracts; and 52.232–16, FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Al Matera, Progress Payments). Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) Director, Acquisition Policy Division. The Councils considered all 501–4755, for information pertaining to comments when developing the final Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA status or publication schedules. For rule, which differs from the proposed amend 48 CFR parts 2, 32, and 52 as set clarification of content, contact Mr. rule by— forth below: Jeremy Olson at (202) 501–3221. Please • Requiring that the contractor 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR cite FAC 2001–02, FAR case 1999–023. include an invoice number on the parts 2, 32, and 52 continues to read as SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: invoice, to be consistent with the OMB follows: A. Background regulations at 5 CFR 1316.9(b); Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. • Clarifying that, when a proper chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). DoD, GSA, and NASA published a invoice is rejected in error, the payment proposed rule in the Federal Register at office will use the original date the PART 2—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS 65 FR 52244 on August 28, 2000. The invoice was received for the purposes of AND TERMS proposed rule— computing any interest penalties that • Conformed the prompt payment 2. Amend section 2.101 by revising may be due the contractor; and the definition ‘‘Proper invoice’’; and coverage to OMB regulations. The rule • Making several editorial changes. revises the FAR to conform the prompt This is not a significant regulatory adding, in alphabetical order, the payment coverage with an OMB final action, and therefore, was not subject to definition ‘‘Receiving report’’ to read as rule published in the Federal Register at review under Section 6(b) of Executive follows: 65 FR 52580 on September 29, 1999. Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and • 2.101 Definitions. Implemented a General Accounting Review, dated September 30, 1993. This Office (GAO) recommendation. In July * * * * * rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. Proper invoice means an invoice that 1999, the GAO published a report 804. (GAO/NSIAD–99–131) entitled Greater meets the minimum standards specified Attention Needed to Identify and B. Regulatory Flexibility Act in 32.905(b). Recover Overpayments. After examining The Department of Defense, the * * * * * the process for identifying and General Services Administration, and Receiving report means written collecting overpayments, GAO the National Aeronautics and Space evidence that indicates Government concluded in their report that ‘‘Under Administration certify that this final acceptance of supplies delivered or current law, there is no requirement for rule will not have a significant services performed (see subpart 46.6). contractors who have been overpaid to economic impact on a substantial Receiving reports must meet the notify the Government of overpayments number of small entities within the requirements of 32.905(c). or to return overpayments prior to the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility * * * * * Government issuing a demand letter’’ Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. since the (i.e., formal notification to the changes are primarily editorial in PART 15—CONTRACTING BY contractor to pay money owed to the nature. For example, FAR 32.905(b) NEGOTIATION Government). One of the adds the stipulation that a proper 15.407 [AMENDED] recommendations of the report was that invoice must include the taxpayer 3. Amend 15.407–1(b)(7)(i) by DoD require contractors to promptly identification number (TIN) and removing ‘‘32.902’’ and adding ‘‘32.001’’ notify the Government of overpayments electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking in its place. made to them. Accordingly, the FAR information, if required by agency rule adds a paragraph to the prompt procedures. This is not new policy as PART 32—CONTRACT FINANCING payment clauses that requires the the current FAR authorizes agencies to contractor to notify the contracting collect TIN (FAR 4.203) and EFT 4. Amend section 32.001 by adding, officer if the contractor becomes aware banking information (FAR 32.1109) in in alphabetical order, the definitions of an overpayment. any manner they choose, such as ‘‘Contract financing payment’’, • Wrote all new and revised text requiring it to be provided on each ‘‘Designated billing office’’, ‘‘Designated using plain language. invoice. payment office’’, and ‘‘Invoice Eleven respondents submitted public payment’’ to read as follows: comments to the proposed rule. One of C. Paperwork Reduction Act the respondents recommended that the The Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. 32.001 Definitions. requirement to notify the contracting L. 104–13) applies because this final * * * * * officer of a duplicate payment or rule contains information collection Contract financing payment means an overpayment not be limited to just requirements. The final rule requires authorized Government disbursement of
VerDate 11
monies to a contractor prior to Construction Contracts, and the clause 32.102 Description of contract financing acceptance of supplies or services by the at 52.232–10, Payments Under Fixed- methods. Government. Price Architect-Engineer Contracts; and * * * * * (1) Contract financing payments (iv) Interim payments under a cost- (d) Payments for accepted supplies include— reimbursement contract for services and services that are only a part of the (i) Advance payments; when Alternate I of the clause at contract requirements (i.e., partial (ii) Performance-based payments; 52.232–25, Prompt Payment, is used. deliveries) are authorized under 41 (iii) Commercial advance and interim (2) Invoice payments do not include U.S.C. 255 and 10 U.S.C. 2307. In payments; contract financing payments. accordance with 5 CFR 1315.4(k), (iv) Progress payments based on cost * * * * * agencies must pay for partial delivery of under the clause at 52.232–16, Progress supplies or partial performance of Payments; 5. Add section 32.007 to read as services unless specifically prohibited (v) Progress payments based on a follows: by the contract. Although payments for percentage or stage of completion (see 32.007 Contract financing payments. partial deliveries generally are treated as 32.102(e)), except those made under the (a)(1) Unless otherwise prescribed in a method of payment and not as a clause at 52.232–5, Payments Under agency policies and procedures or method of contract financing, using Fixed-Price Construction Contracts, or otherwise specified in paragraph (b) of partial delivery payments can assist the clause at 52.232–10, Payments this section, the due date for making contractors to participate in contracts Under Fixed-Price Architect-Engineer contract financing payments by the without, or with minimal, contract Contracts; and financing. When appropriate, contract (vi) Interim payments under a cost designated payment office is the 30th day after the designated billing office statements of work and pricing reimbursement contract, except for a arrangements must permit acceptance cost reimbursement contract for services receives a proper contract financing request. and payment for discrete portions of the when Alternate I of the clause at work, as soon as accepted (see (2) If an audit or other review of a 52.232–25, Prompt Payment, is used. 32.906(c)). specific financing request is required to (2) Contract financing payments do * * * * * not include— ensure compliance with the terms and (i) Invoice payments; conditions of the contract, the 7. Amend Subpart 32.9 by— (ii) Payments for partial deliveries; or designated payment office is not a. Revising sections 32.900, 32.901, (iii) Lease and rental payments. compelled to make payment by the and 32.902; specified due date. b. Removing section 32.903; * * * * * (3) Agency heads may prescribe Designated billing office means the c. Redesignating sections 32.904, shorter periods for payment based on office or person (governmental or 32.905, and 32.906 as sections 32.903, contract pricing or administrative nongovernmental) designated in the 32.904, and 32.905, respectively, and considerations. For example, a shorter contract where the contractor first revising; period may be justified by an agency if submits invoices and contract financing d. Adding section 32.906; the nature and extent of contract requests. The contract might designate e. Revising sections 32.907, 32.908, financing arrangements are integrated different offices to receive invoices and and 32.909; and with agency contract pricing policies. contract financing requests. The f. Removing sections 32.907–1 and designated billing office might be— (4) Agency heads must not prescribe 32.907–2. (1) The Government disbursing office; a period shorter than 7 days or longer The revised and added text reads as (2) The contract administration office; than 30 days. follows: (3) The office accepting the supplies (b) For advance payments, loans, or Sec. other arrangements that do not involve delivered or services performed by the Subpart 32.9—Prompt Payment contractor; recurrent submission of contract financing requests, the designated 32.900 Scope of subpart. (4) The contract audit office; or 32.901 Applicability. (5) A nongovernmental agent. payment office will make payment in accordance with the applicable contract 32.902 Definitions. Designated payment office means the 32.903 Responsibilities. office designated in the contract to make financing terms or as directed by the 32.904 Determining payment due dates. invoice payments or contract financing contracting officer. 32.905 Payment documentation and payments. Normally, this will be the (c) A proper contract financing process. Government disbursing office. request must comply with the terms and 32.906 Making payments. 32.907 Interest penalties. * * * * * conditions specified by the contract. The contractor must correct any defects 32.908 Contract clauses. Invoice payment means a Government 32.909 Contractor inquiries. disbursement of monies to a contractor in requests submitted in the manner under a contract or other authorization specified in the contract or as directed 32.900 Scope of subpart. by the contracting officer. for supplies or services accepted by the This subpart prescribes policies, (d) The designated billing office and Government. procedures, and clauses for designated payment office must (1) Invoice payments include— implementing Office of Management annotate each contract financing request (i) Payments for partial deliveries that and Budget (OMB) prompt payment with the date their respective offices have been accepted by the Government; regulations at 5 CFR part 1315. (ii) Final cost or fee payments where received the request. amounts owed have been settled (e) The Government will not pay an 32.901 Applicability. between the Government and the interest penalty to the contractor as a (a) This subpart applies to invoice contractor; result of delayed contract financing payments on all contracts, except (iii) For purposes of subpart 32.9 only, payments. contracts with payment terms and late all payments made under the clause at 6. Amend section 32.102 by revising payment penalties established by other 52.232–5, Payments Under Fixed-Price paragraph (d) to read as follows: governmental authority (e.g., tariffs).
VerDate 11
(b) This subpart does not apply to consideration to the time reasonably (2) If the contract does not require contract financing payments (see required by Government officials to submission of an invoice for payment definition at 32.001). fulfill their administrative (e.g., periodic lease payments), the responsibilities under the contract. contracting officer must specify the due 32.902 Definitions. (b) Payment due dates. Except as date in the contract. As used in this subpart— prescribed in paragraphs (c) through (f) (3) If the designated billing office fails Discount for prompt payment means of this section, or as authorized in to annotate the invoice with the actual an invoice payment reduction offered by 32.908(a)(2) or (c)(2), the due date for date of receipt at the time of receipt, the the contractor for payment prior to the making an invoice payment is as invoice payment due date is the 30th due date. follows: day after the date of the contractor’s Mixed invoice means an invoice that (1) The later of the following two invoice, provided the designated billing contains items with different payment events: office receives a proper invoice and due dates. (i) The 30th day after the designated there is no disagreement over quantity, Payment date means the date on billing office receives a proper invoice quality, or contractor compliance with which a check for payment is dated or, from the contractor (except as provided contract requirements. for an electronic funds transfer (EFT), in paragraph (b)(3) of this section). (c) Architect-engineer contracts. (1) the settlement date. (ii) The 30th day after Government The due date for making payments on Settlement date, as it applies to acceptance of supplies delivered or contracts that contain the clause at electronic funds transfer, means the date services performed. 52.232–10, Payments Under Fixed-Price on which an electronic funds transfer (A) For a final invoice, when the Architect-EngineerContracts, is as payment is credited to the contractor’s payment amount is subject to contract follows: financial institution. settlement actions, acceptance is (i) The due date for work or services deemed to occur on the effective date of completed by the contractor is the later 32.903 Responsibilities. the contract settlement. of the following two events: (a) Agency heads— (B) For the sole purpose of computing (A) The 30th day after the designated (1) Must establish the policies and an interest penalty that might be due the billing office receives a proper invoice procedures necessary to implement this contractor— from the contractor. subpart; (1) Government acceptance is deemed (B) The 30th day after Government (2) May prescribe additional to occur constructively on the 7th day acceptance of the work or services standards for establishing invoice after the contractor delivers supplies or completed by the contractor. payment due dates (see 32.904) performs services in accordance with (1) For a final invoice, when the necessary to support agency programs the terms and conditions of the contract, payment amount is subject to contract and foster prompt payment to unless there is a disagreement over settlement actions (e.g., release of contractors; quantity, quality, or contractor claims), acceptance is deemed to occur (3) May adopt different payment compliance with a contract requirement; on the effective date of the settlement. procedures in order to accommodate (2) If actual acceptance occurs within (2) For the sole purpose of computing unique circumstances, provided that the constructive acceptance period, the an interest penalty that might be due the such procedures are consistent with the Government must base the contractor, Government acceptance is policies in this subpart; determination of an interest penalty on deemed to occur constructively on the (4) Must inform contractors of points the actual date of acceptance; 7th day after the contractor completes of contact within their cognizant (3) The constructive acceptance the work or services in accordance with payment offices to enable contractors to requirement does not compel the terms and conditions of the contract obtain status of invoices; and Government officials to accept supplies (see also paragraph (c)(2) of this (5) May authorize the use of the or services, perform contract section). If actual acceptance occurs accelerated payment methods specified administration functions, or make within the constructive acceptance at 5 CFR 1315.5. payment prior to fulfilling their period, the Government must base the (b) When drafting solicitations and responsibilities; and determination of an interest penalty on contracts, contracting officers must (4) Except for a contract for the the actual date of acceptance. identify for each contract line item purchase of a commercial item, (ii) The due date for progress number, subline item number, or exhibit including a brand-name commercial payments is the 30th day after line item number— item for authorized resale (e.g., Government approval of contractor (1) The applicable Prompt Payment commissary items), the contracting estimates of work or services clauses that apply to each item when officer may specify a longer period for accomplished. For the sole purpose of the solicitation or contract contains constructive acceptance in the computing an interest penalty that items that will be subject to different solicitation and resulting contract, if might be due the contractor— payment terms; and required to afford the Government a (A) Government approval is deemed (2) The applicable Prompt Payment reasonable opportunity to inspect and to occur constructively on the 7th day food category (e.g., which item numbers test the supplies furnished or to after the designated billing office are meat or meat food products, which evaluate the services performed. The receives the contractor estimates (see are perishable agricultural contracting officer must document in also paragraph (c)(2) of this section). commodities), when the solicitation or the contract file the justification for (B) If actual approval occurs within contract contains multiple payment extending the constructive acceptance the constructive approval period, the terms for various classes of foods and period beyond 7 days. Extended Government must base the edible products. acceptance periods must not be a determination of an interest penalty on routine agency practice and must be the actual date of approval. 32.904 Determining payment due dates. used only when necessary to permit (iii) If the designated billing office (a) General. Agency procedures must proper Government inspection and fails to annotate the invoice or payment ensure that, when specifying due dates, testing of the supplies delivered or request with the actual date of receipt at contracting officers give full services performed. the time of receipt, the payment due
VerDate 11
date is the 30th day after the date of the substantiation of amounts requested are (iii) The constructive acceptance contractor’s invoice or payment request, provided as required by the clause at requirement does not compel provided the designated billing office 52.232–5, Payments Under Fixed- Government officials to accept work or receives a proper invoice or payment PriceConstruction Contracts. services, approve contractor estimates, request and there is no disagreement (ii) The due date for payment of any perform contract administration over quantity, quality, or contractor amounts retained by the contracting functions, or make payment prior to compliance with contract requirements. officer in accordance with the clause at fulfilling their responsibilities; and (2) The constructive acceptance and 52.232–5, Payments Under Fixed-Price (iv) The contracting officer may constructive approval requirements Construction Contracts, will be as specify a longer period for constructive described in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) specified in the contract or, if not acceptance or constructive approval in of this section are conditioned upon specified, 30 days after approval by the the solicitation and resulting contract, if receipt of a proper payment request and contracting officer for release to the required to afford the Government a no disagreement over quantity, quality, contractor. The contracting officer must reasonable opportunity to adequately contractor compliance with contract base the release of retained amounts on inspect the work and to determine the requirements, or the requested progress the contracting officer’s determination adequacy of the contractor’s payment amount. These requirements that satisfactory progress has been performance under the contract. The do not compel Government officials to made. contracting officer must document in accept work or services, approve (iii) The due date for final payments the contract file the justification for contractor estimates, perform contract based on completion and acceptance of extending the constructive acceptance administration functions, or make all work (including any retained or approval beyond 7 days. payment prior to fulfilling their amounts), and payments for partial deliveries that have been accepted by (3) Construction contracts contain responsibilities. The contracting officer special provisions concerning contractor may specify a longer period for the Government (e.g., each separate building, public work, or other division payments to subcontractors, along with constructive acceptance or constructive special contractor certification approval, if required to afford the of the contract for which the price is stated separately in the contract) is as requirements. The Office of Government a reasonable opportunity to Management and Budget has inspect and test the supplies furnished follows: (A) The later of the following two determined that these certifications or to evaluate the services performed. events: must not be construed as final The contracting officer must document (1) The 30th day after the designated acceptance of the subcontractor’s in the contract file the justification for billing office receives a proper invoice performance. The certification in extending the constructive acceptance from the contractor. 52.232–5(c) implements this or approval period beyond 7 days. (2) The 30th day after Government determination; however, certificates are (d) Construction contracts. (1) The acceptance of the work or services still acceptable if the contractor deletes due date for making payments on completed by the contractor. For a final paragraph (c)(4) of 52.232–5 from the construction contracts is as follows: invoice, when the payment amount is certificate. (i) The due date for making progress subject to contract settlement actions (4)(i) Paragraph (d) of the clause at payments based on contracting officer (e.g., release of contractor claims), 52.232–5, Payments under Fixed-Price approval of the estimated amount and acceptance is deemed to occur on the Construction Contracts, and paragraph value of work or services performed, effective date of the contract settlement. (e)(6) of the clause at 52.232–27, Prompt including payments for reaching (B) If the designated billing office fails Payment for Construction Contracts, milestones in any project, is 14 days to annotate the invoice with the actual provide for the contractor to pay interest after the designated billing office date of receipt at the time of receipt, the on unearned amounts in certain receives a proper payment request. invoice payment due date is the 30th circumstances. The Government must (A) If the designated billing office fails day after the date of the contractor’s recover this interest from subsequent to annotate the payment request with invoice, provided the designated billing payments to the contractor. Therefore, the actual date of receipt at the time of office receives a proper invoice and contracting officers normally must make receipt, the payment due date is the there is no disagreement over quantity, no demand for payment. Contracting 14th day after the date of the quality, or contractor compliance with officers must— contractor’s payment request, provided contract requirements. (A) Compute the amount in the designated billing office receives a (2) For the sole purpose of computing accordance with the clause; proper payment request and there is no an interest penalty that might be due the disagreement over quantity, quality, or (B) Provide the contractor with a final contractor for payments described in decision; and contractor compliance with contract paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section— requirements. (i) Government acceptance or (C) Notify the payment office of the (B) The contracting officer may approval is deemed to occur amount to be withheld. specify a longer period in the constructively on the 7th day after the (ii) The payment office is responsible solicitation and resulting contract if contractor completes the work or for making the deduction of interest. required to afford the Government a services in accordance with the terms Amounts collected in accordance with reasonable opportunity to adequately and conditions of the contract, unless these provisions revert to the United inspect the work and to determine the there is a disagreement over quantity, States Treasury. adequacy of the contractor’s quality, contractor compliance with a (e) Cost-reimbursement contracts for performance under the contract. The contract requirement, or the requested services. For purposes of computing late contracting officer must document in amount; payment interest penalties that may the contract file the justification for (ii) If actual acceptance occurs within apply, the due date for making interim extending the due date beyond 14 days. the constructive acceptance period, the payments on cost-reimbursement (C) The contracting officer must not Government must base the contracts for services is 30 days after the approve progress payment requests determination of an interest penalty on date of receipt of a proper invoice. unless the certification and the actual date of acceptance; (f) Food and specified items.
VerDate 11
Payment must be made as close If the items delivered are: as possible to, but not later than:
(1) Meat or meat food products. As defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Packers and Stockyard Act of 1921 (7 7th day after product delivery. U.S.C. 182(3)), and as further defined in Public Law 98–181, including any edible fresh or frozen poultry meat, any perishable poultry meat food product, fresh eggs, and any perishable egg product. (2) Fresh or frozen fish. As defined in section 204(3) of the Fish and Seafood Promotion Act of 1986 (16 7th day after product delivery. U.S.C. 4003(3)). (3) Perishable agricultural commodities. As defined in section 1(4) of the Perishable Agricultural Commod- 10th day after product delivery, un- ities Act of 1930 (7 U.S.C. 499a(4)). less another date is specified in the contract. (4) Dairy products. As defined in section 111(e) of the Dairy Production Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 10th day after a proper invoice has 4502(e)), edible fats or oils, and food products prepared from edible fats or oils. Liquid milk, cheese, cer- been received. tain processed cheese products, butter, yogurt, ice cream, mayonnaise, salad dressings, and other simi- lar products fall within this classification. Nothing in the Act limits this classification to refrigerated prod- ucts. If questions arise regarding the proper classification of a specific product, the contracting officer must follow prevailing industry practices in specifying a contract payment due date. The burden of proof that a classification of a specific product is, in fact, prevailing industry practice is upon the contractor making the representation.
(g) Multiple payment due dates. (vii) Name (where practicable), title, products, edible fats or oils, and food Contracting officers may encourage, but phone number, and mailing address of products prepared from edible fats or not require, contractors to submit person to notify in the event of a oils), with the reasons why it is not a separate invoices for products with defective invoice. proper invoice. If such notice is not different payment due dates under the (viii) Taxpayer Identification Number timely, then the designated billing office same contract or order. When an invoice (TIN). The contractor must include its must adjust the due date for the purpose contains items with different payment TIN on the invoice only if required by of determining an interest penalty, if due dates (i.e., a mixed invoice), the agency procedures. (See 4.9 TIN any. payment office will, subject to agency requirements.) (c) Authorization to pay. All invoice policy— (ix) Electronic funds transfer (EFT) payments, with the exception of interim (1) Pay the entire invoice on the banking information. payments on cost-reimbursement earliest due date; or (A) The contractor must include EFT contracts for services, must be (2) Split invoice payments, making banking information on the invoice only supported by a receiving report or other payments by the applicable due dates. if required by agency procedures. Government documentation authorizing (B) If EFT banking information is not payment (e.g., Government certified 32.905 Payment documentation and required to be on the invoice, in order voucher). The agency receiving official process. for the invoice to be a proper invoice, should forward the receiving report or (a) General. Payment will be based on the contractor must have submitted other Government documentation to the receipt of a proper invoice and correct EFT banking information in designated payment office by the 5th satisfactory contract performance. accordance with the applicable working day after Government (b) Content of invoices. (1) A proper solicitation provision (e.g., 52.232–38, acceptance or approval, unless other invoice must include the following Submission of Electronic Funds arrangements have been made. This items (except for interim payments on Transfer Information with Offer), period of time does not extend the due cost reimbursement contracts for contract clause (e.g., 52.232–33, dates prescribed in this section. services): Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— Acceptance should be completed as (i) Name and address of the Central Contractor Registration, or expeditiously as possible. The receiving contractor. 52.232–34, Payment by Electronic report or other Government (ii) Invoice date and invoice number. Funds Transfer—Other Than Central documentation authorizing payment (Contractors should date invoices as Contractor Registration), or applicable must, as a minimum, include the close as possible to the date of mailing agency procedures. following: or transmission.) (C) EFT banking information is not (1) Contract number or other (iii) Contract number or other required if the Government waived the authorization for supplies delivered or authorization for supplies delivered or requirement to pay by EFT. services performed. services performed (including order (x) Any other information or (2) Description of supplies delivered number and contract line item number). documentation required by the contract or services performed. (iv) Description, quantity, unit of (e.g., evidence of shipment). (3) Quantities of supplies received measure, unit price, and extended price (2) An interim payment request under and accepted or services performed, if of supplies delivered or services a cost-reimbursement contract for applicable. performed. services constitutes a proper invoice for (4) Date supplies delivered or services (v) Shipping and payment terms (e.g., purposes of this subsection if it includes performed. shipment number and date of shipment, all of the information required by the (5) Date that the designated discount for prompt payment terms). contract. Government official— Bill of lading number and weight of (3) If the invoice does not comply (i) Accepted the supplies or services; shipment will be shown for shipments with these requirements, the designated or on Government bills of lading. billing office must return it within 7 (ii) Approved the progress payment (vi) Name and address of contractor days after receipt (3 days on contracts request, if the request is being made official to whom payment is to be sent for meat, meat food products, or fish; 5 under the clause at 52.232–5, Payments (must be the same as that in the contract days on contracts for perishable Under Fixed-Price Construction or in a proper notice of assignment). agricultural commodities, dairy Contracts, or the clause at 52.232–10,
VerDate 11
Payments Under Fixed-Price Architect- (d) Contractor identifier. Each (c) Failure to pay interest. (1) The Engineer Contracts. payment or remittance advice will use designated payment office will pay a (6) Signature, printed name, title, the contractor invoice number in penalty amount, in addition to the mailing address, and telephone number addition to any Government or contract interest penalty amount, only if— of the designated Government official information in describing any payment (i) The Government owes an interest responsible for acceptance or approval made. penalty of $1 or more; functions. (e) Discounts. When a discount for (ii) The designated payment office (d) Billing office. The designated prompt payment is taken, the does not pay the interest penalty within billing office must immediately annotate designated payment office will make 10 days after the date the invoice each invoice with the actual date it payment to the contractor as close as amount is paid; and receives the invoice. possible to, but not later than, the end (iii) The contractor makes a written (e) Payment office. The designated of the discount period. The discount demand to the designated payment payment office will annotate each period is specified by the contractor and office for additional penalty payment in invoice and receiving report with the is calculated from the date of the accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this actual date it receives the invoice. contractor’s proper invoice. If the section, postmarked not later than 40 contractor has not placed a date on the days after the date the invoice amount 32.906 Making payments. invoice, the due date is calculated from is paid. (a) General. The Government will not the date the designated billing office (2)(i) Contractors must support make invoice payments earlier than 7 receives a proper invoice, provided the written demands for additional penalty days prior to the due dates specified in agency annotates such invoice with the payments with the following data. The the contract unless the agency head date of receipt at the time of receipt. Government must not request additional determines— When the discount date falls on a data. Contractors must— (A) Specifically assert that late (1) To make earlier payment on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday payment interest is due under a specific case-by-case basis; or when Government offices are closed, the invoice, and request payment of all (2) That the use of accelerated designated payment office may make overdue late payment interest penalty payment methods are necessary (see payment on the following working day and such additional penalty as may be 32.903(a)(5)). and take a discount. Payment terms are (b) Payment office. The designated required; specified in the clause at 52.232–8, payment office— (B) Attach a copy of the invoice on Discounts for Prompt Payment. (1) Will mail checks on the same day which the unpaid late payment interest they are dated; 32.907 Interest penalties. is due; and (2) For payments made by EFT, will (a) Late payment. The designated (C) State that payment of the principal has been received, including the date of specify a date on or before the payment office will pay an interest receipt. established due date for settlement of penalty automatically, without request the payment at a Federal Reserve Bank; (ii) If there is no postmark or the from the contractor, when all of the postmark is illegible— (3) When the due date falls on a following conditions, if applicable, have Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday (A) The designated payment office been met: that receives the demand will annotate when Government offices are closed, (1) The designated billing office may make payment on the following it with the date of receipt, provided the received a proper invoice. demand is received on or before the working day without incurring a late (2) The Government processed a payment interest penalty. 40th day after payment was made; or receiving report or other Government (B) If the designated payment office (4) When it is determined that the documentation authorizing payment, designated billing office erroneously fails to make the required annotation, and there was no disagreement over the Government will determine the rejected a proper invoice and upon quantity, quality, or contractor resubmission of the invoice, will enter demand’s validity based on the date the compliance with any contract contractor has placed on the demand; in the payment system the original date requirement. the invoice was received by the provided such date is no later than the (3) In the case of a final invoice, the 40th day after payment was made. designated billing office for the purpose payment amount is not subject to (d) Disagreements. (1) The payment of calculating the correct payment due further contract settlement actions office will not pay interest penalties if date and any interest penalties that may between the Government and the payment delays are due to disagreement be due. contractor. between the Government and contractor (c) Partial deliveries. (1) Contracting (4) The designated payment office concerning— officers must, where the nature of the paid the contractor after the due date. (i) The payment amount; work permits, write contract statements (5) In the case of interim payments on (ii) Contract compliance; or of work and pricing arrangements that cost-reimbursement contracts for (iii) Amounts temporarily withheld or allow contractors to deliver and receive services, when payment is made more retained in accordance with the terms of invoice payments for discrete portions than 30 days after the designated billing the contract. of the work as soon as completed and office receives a proper invoice. (2) The Government and the found acceptable by the Government (b) Improperly taken discount. The contractor must resolve claims (see 32.102(d)). designated payment office will pay an involving disputes, and any interest that (2) Unless specifically prohibited by interest penalty automatically, without may be payable in accordance with the the contract, the clause at 52.232–1, request from the contractor, if the Disputes clause. Payments, provides that the contractor Government takes a discount for prompt (e) Computation of interest penalties. is entitled to payment for accepted payment improperly. The interest The Government will compute interest partial deliveries of supplies or partial penalty is calculated on the amount of penalties in accordance with OMB performance of services that comply discount taken for the period beginning prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR with all applicable contract with the first day after the end of the part 1315. These regulations are requirements and for which prices can discount period through the date when available via the Internet at http:// be calculated from the contract terms. the contractor is paid. www.fms.treas.gov/prompt/.
VerDate 11
(f) Unavailability of funds. The constructive acceptance, if required to (iv) Description, quantity, unit of measure, temporary unavailability of funds to afford the Government a reasonable unit price and extended price of the items make a timely payment does not relieve opportunity to inspect and test the delivered; an agency from the obligation to pay supplies furnished or to evaluate the (v) Shipping number and date of shipment, including the bill of lading number and interest penalties. services performed, except in the case of weight of shipment if shipped on a contract for the purchase of a 32.908 Contract clauses. Government bill of lading; commercial item, including a brand- (vi) Terms of any discount for prompt (a) Insert the clause at 52.232–26, name commercial item for authorized payment offered; Prompt Payment for Fixed-Price resale (e.g., commissary items). (vii) Name and address of official to whom Architect-Engineer Contracts, in (2) As provided in 32.903, agency payment is to be sent; solicitations and contracts that contain policies and procedures may authorize (viii) Name, title, and phone number of the clause at 52.232–10, Payments amendment of paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and person to notify in event of defective invoice; Under Fixed-Price Architect-Engineer and (ii) of the clause to insert a period (ix) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). Contracts. shorter than 30 days (but not less than (1) As authorized in 32.904(c)(2), the The Contractor shall include its TIN on the 7 days) for making contract invoice invoice only if required elsewhere in this contracting officer may modify the date payments. contract. in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of the clause to (3) If the contract is a cost- (x) Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking specify a period longer than 7 days for reimbursement contract for services, use information. constructive acceptance or constructive the clause with its Alternate I. (A) The Contractor shall include EFT approval, if required to afford the banking information on the invoice only if Government a practicable opportunity 32.909 Contractor inquiries. required elsewhere in this contract. to inspect and test the supplies (a) Direct questions involving— (B) If EFT banking information is not furnished or evaluate the services required to be on the invoice, in order for the (1) Delinquent payments to the invoice to be a proper invoice, the Contractor performed. designated billing office or designated shall have submitted correct EFT banking (2) As provided in 32.903, agency payment office; and information in accordance with the policies and procedures may authorize (2) Disagreements in payment amount applicable solicitation provision, contract amendment of paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and or timing to the contracting officer for clause (e.g., 52.232–33, Payment by (ii) of the clause to insert a period resolution. The contracting officer must Electronic Funds Transfer—Central shorter than 30 days (but not less than coordinate within appropriate Contractor Registration, or 52.232–34, 7 days) for making contract invoice contracting channels and seek the Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— Other Than Central Contractor Registration), payments. advice of other offices as necessary to (b) Insert the clause at 52.232–27, or applicable agency procedures. resolve disagreements. (C) EFT banking information is not Prompt Payment for Construction (b) Small business concerns may Contracts, in all solicitations and required if the Government waived the contact the agency’s local small requirement to pay by EFT. contracts for construction (see part 36). business specialist or representative (2) Invoices will be handled in accordance (1) As authorized in 32.904(d)(1)(i)(B), from the Office of Small and with the Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. the contracting officer may modify the Disadvantaged Business Utilization to 3903) and Office of Management and Budget date in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of the obtain additional assistance related to (OMB) prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR clause to specify a period longer than 14 payment issues, late payment interest part 1315. days if required to afford the penalties, and information on the * * * * * Government a reasonable opportunity to Prompt Payment Act. (i) Payment. * * * The Government will adequately inspect the work and to make payment in accordance with the determine the adequacy of the PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS Prompt Payment Act (31 U.S.C. 3903) and Contractor’s performance under the AND CONTRACT CLAUSES OMB prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR contract. part 1315. * * * (2) As authorized in 32.904(d)(2)(iv), 8. Amend section 52.212–4 by— * * * * * the contracting officer may modify the a. Revising the date of the clause; (End of clause) date in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of the clause b. Revising paragraph (g) (and to specify a period longer than 7 days removing the undesignated paragraph 52.213–4 [Amended] for constructive acceptance or that follows) of the clause; and 9. In section 52.213–4, amend the constructive approval if required to c. Revising the second sentence of clause heading by removing ‘‘(May afford the Government a reasonable paragraph (i) of the clause to read as 2001)’’ and adding ‘‘(Feb 2002)’’ in its opportunity to inspect and test the follows: place; and in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) by supplies furnished or evaluate the removing ‘‘(May 1997)’’ and in services performed. 52.212–4 Contract terms and conditions— commercial items. paragraph (a)(2)(iv) by removing ‘‘(June (c) Insert the clause at 52.232–25, 1997)’’ and adding ‘‘(FEB 2002)’’ in their Prompt Payment, in all other * * * * * places, respectively. solicitations and contracts, except when 10. Amend section 52.216–7 by the clause at 52.212–4, Contract Terms Contract Terms and Conditions— Commercial Items (Feb 2002) revising the date of the clause and and Conditions—Commercial Items, paragraph (a) to read as follows: applies, or when payment terms and * * * * * late payment penalties are established (g) Invoice. (1) The Contractor shall submit 52.216–7 Allowable Cost and Payment. an original invoice and three copies (or by other governmental authority (e.g., * * * * * tariffs). electronic invoice, if authorized) to the address designated in the contract to receive (1) As authorized in invoices. An invoice must include— Allowable Cost and Payment (Feb 2002) 32.904(b)(1)(ii)(B)(4), the contracting (i) Name and address of the Contractor; (a) Invoicing. (1) The Government will officer may modify the date in (ii) Invoice date and number; make payments to the Contractor when paragraph (a)(5)(i) of the clause to (iii) Contract number, contract line item requested as work progresses, but (except for specify a period longer than 7 days for number and, if applicable, the order number; small business concerns) not more often than
VerDate 11
once every 2 weeks, in amounts determined not compelled to make payment by the 52.232–16 Progress payments. to be allowable by the Contracting Officer in specified due date. * * * * * accordance with Federal Acquisition * * * * * Regulation (FAR) subpart 31.2 in effect on (End of clause) Progress Payments (Feb 2002) the date of this contract and the terms of this contract. The Contractor may submit to an 12. Amend section 52.232–7 by * * * * * (l) Due date. The designated payment authorized representative of the Contracting revising the date of the clause; by office will make progress payments on the Officer, in such form and reasonable detail as adding paragraph (h); and by revising llll [Contracting Officer insert date as the representative may require, an invoice or Alternate II to read as follows: prescribed by agency head; if not prescribed, voucher supported by a statement of the insert ‘‘30th’’] day after the designated billing claimed allowable cost for performing this 52.232–7 Payments under time-and- office receives a proper progress payment contract. materials and labor-hour contracts. request. In the event that the Government (2) Contract financing payments are not * * * * * requires an audit or other review of a specific subject to the interest penalty provisions of progress payment request to ensure the Prompt Payment Act. Interim payments Payments Under Time-and-Materials and compliance with the terms and conditions of made prior to the final payment under the Labor-Hour Contracts (Feb 2002) the contract, the designated payment office is contract are contract financing payments, not compelled to make payment by the except interim payments if this contract * * * * * (h) Interim payments. (1) Interim payments specified due date. Progress payments are contains Alternate I to the clause at 52.232– considered contract financing and are not 25. made prior to the final payment under the contract are contract financing payments. subject to the interest penalty provisions of (3) The designated payment office will the Prompt Payment Act. make interim payments for contract financing Contract financing payments are not subject on the llll[Contracting Officer insert to the interest penalty provisions of the (End of clause) day as prescribed by agency head; if not Prompt Payment Act. * * * * * (2) The designated payment office will prescribed, insert ‘‘30th’’] day after the Alternate II (Feb 2002). If the contract is a make interim payments for contract financing designated billing office receives a proper letter contract, add paragraphs (m) and (n). on the llll[Contracting Officer insert payment request. The amount specified in paragraph (n) must day as prescribed by agency head; if not In the event that the Government requires not exceed 80 percent applied to the prescribed, insert ‘‘30th’’] day after the an audit or other review of a specific maximum liability of the Government under designated billing office receives a proper payment request to ensure compliance with the letter contract. Separate limits may be payment request. In the event that the the terms and conditions of the contract, the specified for separate parts of the work. Government requires an audit or other review designated payment office is not compelled (m) Progress payments made under this of a specific payment request to ensure to make payment by the specified due date. letter contract shall, unless previously compliance with the terms and conditions of liquidated under paragraph (b) of this clause, * * * * * the contract, the designated payment office is be liquidated under the following (End of clause) not compelled to make payment by the procedures: specified due date. 11. Amend section 52.216–13 by (1) If this letter contract is superseded by (End of clause) a definitive contract, unliquidated progress revising the date of the clause and * * * * * payments made under this letter contract paragraph (b) to read as follows: Alternate II (Feb 2002). If a labor-hour shall be liquidated by deducting the amount 52.216–13 Allowable Cost and Payment— contract is contemplated, and if no specific from the first progress or other payments Facilities. reimbursement for materials furnished is made under the definitive contract. intended, the Contracting Officer may add (2) If this letter contract is not superseded * * * * * the following paragraph (i) to the basic by a definitive contract calling for the Allowable Cost and Payment—Facilities (Feb clause: furnishing of all or part of the articles or 2002) (i) The terms of this clause that govern services covered under the letter contract, reimbursement for materials furnished are unliquidated progress payments made under * * * * * considered to have been deleted. the letter contract shall be liquidated by (b) Invoicing. (1) The Government will deduction from the amount payable under make payments to the Contractor when 13. Amend section 52.232–8 by revising the date of the clause and the the Termination clause. requested once each month. The Contractor (3) If this letter contract is partly may submit to an authorized representative last sentence of paragraph (a) to read as terminated and partly superseded by a of the Contracting Officer, in such form and follows: contract, the Government will allocate the reasonable detail as the representative may 52.232–8 Discounts for prompt payment. unliquidated progress payments to the require, an invoice or voucher supported by terminated and unterminated portions as the a statement of the claimed allowable cost for * * * * * Government deems equitable, and will the performance of this contract. Discounts for Prompt Payment (Feb liquidate each portion under the relevant (2) Contract financing payments are not procedure in paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of subject to the interest penalty provisions of 2002) this clause. the Prompt Payment Act. Interim payments (a) * * * As an alternative to offering (4) If the method of liquidating progress made prior to the final payment under the a discount for prompt payment in payments provided in this clause does not contract are contract financing payments, conjunction with the offer, offerors result in full liquidation, the Contractor shall except interim payments if this contract immediately pay the unliquidated balance to contains Alternate I to the clause at 52.232– awarded contracts may include discounts for prompt payment on the Government on demand. 25. (n) The amount of unliquidated progress (3) The designated payment office will individual invoices. payments shall not exceed llll make interim payments for contract financing * * * * * [Contracting Officer specify dollar amount]. on the llll[Contracting Officer insert 14. Amend section 52.232–16 by Alternate III (Feb 2002). As prescribed in day as prescribed by agency head; if not revising the date of the clause; by 35.502–4(d), add the following paragraph (m) prescribed, insert ‘‘30th’’] day after the adding paragraph (l) to the end of the to the basic clause. If Alternate II is also designated billing office receives a proper clause; by revising Alternate II; and by being used, redesignate the following payment request. In the event that the paragraph as paragraph (o): Government requires an audit or other review revising the introductory text of of a specific payment request to ensure Alternate III and redesignating Alternate 15. Revise sections 52.232–25, compliance with the terms and conditions of III paragraph (l) as (m). The added and 52.232–26, and 52.232–27 to read as the contract, the designated payment office is revised text reads as follows: follows:
VerDate 11
52.232–25 Prompt payment. edible fats or oils, and food products shall have submitted correct EFT banking As prescribed in 32.908(c), insert the prepared from edible fats or oils, as close as information in accordance with the following clause: possible to, but not later than, the 10th day applicable solicitation provision (e.g., after the date on which a proper invoice has 52.232–38, Submission of Electronic Funds Prompt Payment (Feb 2002) been received. Liquid milk, cheese, certain Transfer Information with Offer), contract Notwithstanding any other payment clause processed cheese products, butter, yogurt, ice clause (e.g., 52.232–33, Payment by in this contract, the Government will make cream, mayonnaise, salad dressings, and Electronic Funds Transfer—Central invoice payments under the terms and other similar products, fall within this Contractor Registration, or 52.232–34, conditions specified in this clause. The classification. Nothing in the Act limits this Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— Government considers payment as being classification to refrigerated products. When Other Than Central Contractor Registration), made on the day a check is dated or the date questions arise regarding the proper or applicable agency procedures. of an electronic funds transfer (EFT). classification of a specific product, prevailing (C) EFT banking information is not Definitions of pertinent terms are set forth in industry practices will be followed in required if the Government waived the sections 2.101, 32.001, and 32.902 of the specifying a contract payment due date. The requirement to pay by EFT. Federal Acquisition Regulation. All days burden of proof that a classification of a (x) Any other information or referred to in this clause are calendar days, specific product is, in fact, prevailing documentation required by the contract (e.g., unless otherwise specified. (However, see industry practice is upon the Contractor evidence of shipment). paragraph (a)(4) of this clause concerning making the representation. (4) Interest penalty. The designated payments due on Saturdays, Sundays, and (ii) If the contract does not require payment office will pay an interest penalty legal holidays.) submission of an invoice for payment (e.g., automatically, without request from the (a) Invoice payments—(1) Due date. (i) periodic lease payments), the due date will Contractor, if payment is not made by the Except as indicated in paragraphs (a)(2) and be as specified in the contract. due date and the conditions listed in (c) of this clause, the due date for making (3) Contractor’s invoice. The Contractor paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (a)(4)(iii) of this invoice payments by the designated payment shall prepare and submit invoices to the clause are met, if applicable. However, when office is the later of the following two events: designated billing office specified in the the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or (A) The 30th day after the designated contract. A proper invoice must include the legal holiday, the designated payment office billing office receives a proper invoice from items listed in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through may make payment on the following working the Contractor (except as provided in (a)(3)(x) of this clause. If the invoice does not day without incurring a late payment interest paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this clause). comply with these requirements, the penalty. (B) The 30th day after Government designated billing office will return it within (i) The designated billing office received a acceptance of supplies delivered or services 7 days after receipt (3 days for meat, meat proper invoice. performed. For a final invoice, when the food products, or fish; 5 days for perishable (ii) The Government processed a receiving payment amount is subject to contract agricultural commodities, dairy products, report or other Government documentation settlement actions, acceptance is deemed to edible fats or oils, and food products authorizing payment, and there was no occur on the effective date of the contract prepared from edible fats or oils), with the disagreement over quantity, quality, or settlement. reasons why it is not a proper invoice. The Contractor compliance with any contract (ii) If the designated billing office fails to Government will take into account untimely term or condition. annotate the invoice with the actual date of notification when computing any interest (iii) In the case of a final invoice for any receipt at the time of receipt, the invoice penalty owed the Contractor. balance of funds due the Contractor for payment due date is the 30th day after the (i) Name and address of the Contractor. supplies delivered or services performed, the date of the Contractor’s invoice, provided the (ii) Invoice date and invoice number. (The amount was not subject to further contract designated billing office receives a proper Contractor should date invoices as close as settlement actions between the Government invoice and there is no disagreement over possible to the date of the mailing or and the Contractor. quantity, quality, or Contractor compliance transmission.) (5) Computing penalty amount. The with contract requirements. (iii) Contract number or other authorization Government will compute the interest (2) Certain food products and other for supplies delivered or services performed penalty in accordance with the Office of payments. (i) Due dates on Contractor (including order number and contract line Management and Budget prompt payment invoices for meat, meat food products, or item number). regulations at 5 CFR part 1315. fish; perishable agricultural commodities; (iv) Description, quantity, unit of measure, (i) For the sole purpose of computing an and dairy products, edible fats or oils, and unit price, and extended price of supplies interest penalty that might be due the food products prepared from edible fats or delivered or services performed. Contractor, Government acceptance is oils are— (v) Shipping and payment terms (e.g., deemed to occur constructively on the 7th (A) For meat or meat food products, as shipment number and date of shipment, day (unless otherwise specified in this defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Packers and discount for prompt payment terms). Bill of contract) after the Contractor delivers the Stockyard Act of 1921 (7 U.S.C. 182(3)), and lading number and weight of shipment will supplies or performs the services in as further defined in Pub. L. 98–181, be shown for shipments on Government bills accordance with the terms and conditions of including any edible fresh or frozen poultry of lading. the contract, unless there is a disagreement meat, any perishable poultry meat food (vi) Name and address of Contractor over quantity, quality, or Contractor product, fresh eggs, and any perishable egg official to whom payment is to be sent (must compliance with a contract provision. If product, as close as possible to, but not later be the same as that in the contract or in a actual acceptance occurs within the than, the 7th day after product delivery. proper notice of assignment). constructive acceptance period, the (B) For fresh or frozen fish, as defined in (vii) Name (where practicable), title, phone Government will base the determination of section 204(3) of the Fish and Seafood number, and mailing address of person to an interest penalty on the actual date of Promotion Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 4003(3)), as notify in the event of a defective invoice. acceptance. The constructive acceptance close as possible to, but not later than, the (viii) Taxpayer Identification Number requirement does not, however, compel 7th day after product delivery. (TIN). The Contractor shall include its TIN Government officials to accept supplies or (C) For perishable agricultural on the invoice only if required elsewhere in services, perform contract administration commodities, as defined in section 1(4) of the this contract. functions, or make payment prior to fulfilling Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of (ix) Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking their responsibilities. 1930 (7 U.S.C. 499a(4)), as close as possible information. (ii) The prompt payment regulations at 5 to, but not later than, the 10th day after (A) The Contractor shall include EFT CFR 1315.10(c) do not require the product delivery, unless another date is banking information on the invoice only if Government to pay interest penalties if specified in the contract. required elsewhere in this contract. payment delays are due to disagreement (D) For dairy products, as defined in (B) If EFT banking information is not between the Government and the Contractor section 111(e) of the Dairy Production required to be on the invoice, in order for the over the payment amount or other issues Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4502(e)), invoice to be a proper invoice, the Contractor involving contract compliance, or on
VerDate 11
amounts temporarily withheld or retained in that the Government has otherwise overpaid disagreement over quantity, quality, or accordance with the terms of the contract. on an invoice payment, the Contractor shall Contractor compliance with contract The Government and the Contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer requirements. resolve claims involving disputes and any and request instructions for disposition of the (2) Contractor’s invoice. The Contractor interest that may be payable in accordance overpayment. shall prepare and submit invoices to the with the clause at FAR 52.233–1, Disputes. (End of clause) designated billing office specified in the (6) Discounts for prompt payment. The Alternate I (Feb 2002). As prescribed in contract. A proper invoice must include the designated payment office will pay an 32.908(c)(3), add the following paragraph (e) items listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through interest penalty automatically, without to the basic clause: (a)(2)(x) of this clause. If the invoice does not request from the Contractor, if the (e) Invoices for interim payments. For comply with these requirements, the Government takes a discount for prompt interim payments under this cost- designated billing office will return it within payment improperly. The Government will reimbursement contract for services— 7 days after receipt, with the reasons why it calculate the interest penalty in accordance (1) Paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4)(ii), is not a proper invoice. When computing any with the prompt payment regulations at 5 (a)(4)(iii), and (a)(5)(i) do not apply; interest penalty owed the Contractor, the CFR part 1315. (2) For purposes of computing late Government will take into account if the (7) Additional interest penalty. (i) The payment interest penalties that may apply, Government notifies the Contractor of an designated payment office will pay a penalty the due date for payment is the 30th day after improper invoice in an untimely manner. amount, calculated in accordance with the the designated billing office receives a proper (i) Name and address of the Contractor. prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR part invoice; and (ii) Invoice date and invoice number. (The 1315 in addition to the interest penalty (3) The contractor shall submit invoices for Contractor should date invoices as close as possible to the date of mailing or amount only if— interim payments in accordance with transmission.) (A) The Government owes an interest paragraph (a) of FAR 52.216–7, Allowable (iii) Contract number or other authorization penalty of $1 or more; Cost and Payment. If the invoice does not for work or services performed (including (B) The designated payment office does not comply with contract requirements, it will be order number and contract line item pay the interest penalty within 10 days after returned within 7 days after the date the number). the date the invoice amount is paid; and designated billing office received the invoice. (C) The Contractor makes a written (iv) Description of work or services demand to the designated payment office for 52.232–26 Prompt payment for fixed-price performed. additional penalty payment, in accordance architect-engineer contracts. (v) Delivery and payment terms (e.g., with paragraph (a)(7)(ii) of this clause, discount for prompt payment terms). As prescribed in 32.908(a), insert the (vi) Name and address of Contractor postmarked not later than 40 days after the following clause: official to whom payment is to be sent (must invoice amount is paid. be the same as that in the contract or in a (ii)(A) The Contractor shall support written Prompt Payment for Fixed-Price Architect- proper notice of assignment). demands for additional penalty payments Engineer Contracts (FEB 2002) (vii) Name (where practicable), title, phone with the following data. The Government Notwithstanding any other payment terms number, and mailing address of person to will not request any additional data. The in this contract, the Government will make notify in the event of a defective invoice. Contractor shall— invoice payments under the terms and (viii) Taxpayer Identification Number (1) Specifically assert that late payment conditions specified in this clause. The (TIN). The Contractor shall include its TIN interest is due under a specific invoice, and Government considers payment as being on the invoice only if required elsewhere in request payment of all overdue late payment made on the day a check is dated or the date this contract. interest penalty and such additional penalty of an electronic funds transfer. Definitions of (ix) Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking as may be required; pertinent terms are set forth in sections information. (2) Attach a copy of the invoice on which 2.101, 32.001, and 32.902 of the Federal (A) The Contractor shall include EFT the unpaid late payment interest is due; and Acquisition Regulation. All days referred to banking information on the invoice only if (3) State that payment of the principal has in this clause are calendar days, unless required elsewhere in this contract. been received, including the date of receipt. otherwise specified. (However, see paragraph (B) If EFT banking information is not (B) If there is no postmark or the postmark (a)(3) of this clause concerning payments due required to be on the invoice, in order for the is illegible— on Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays.) invoice to be a proper invoice, the Contractor (1) The designated payment office that (a) Invoice payments—(1) Due date. The shall have submitted correct EFT banking receives the demand will annotate it with the due date for making invoice payments is— information in accordance with the date of receipt, provided the demand is (i) For work or services completed by the applicable solicitation provision (e.g., received on or before the 40th day after Contractor, the later of the following two 52.232–38, Submission of Electronic Funds payment was made; or events: Transfer Information with Offer), contract (2) If the designated payment office fails to (A) The 30th day after the designated clause (e.g., 52.232–33, Payment by make the required annotation, the billing office receives a proper invoice from Electronic Funds Transfer—Central Government will determine the demand’s the Contractor (except as provided in Contractor Registration, or 52.232– validity based on the date the Contractor has paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this clause). 34,Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— placed on the demand, provided such date is (B) The 30th day after Government Other Than Central Contractor Registration), no later than the 40th day after payment was acceptance of the work or services completed or applicable agency procedures. made. by the Contractor. For a final invoice, when (C) EFT banking information is not (iii) The additional penalty does not apply the payment amount is subject to contract required if the Government waived the to payments regulated by other Government settlement actions (e.g., release of claims), requirement to pay by EFT. regulations (e.g., payments under utility acceptance is deemed to occur on the (x) Any other information or contracts subject to tariffs and regulation). effective date of the settlement. documentation required by the contract. (b) Contract financing payment. If this (ii) The due date for progress payments is (3) Interest penalty. The designated contract provides for contract financing, the the 30th day after Government approval of payment office will pay an interest penalty Government will make contract financing Contractor estimates of work or services automatically, without request from the payments in accordance with the applicable accomplished. Contractor, if payment is not made by the contract financing clause. (iii) If the designated billing office fails to due date and the conditions listed in (c) Fast payment procedure due dates. If annotate the invoice or payment request with paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (a)(3)(iii) of this this contract contains the clause at 52.213– the actual date of receipt at the time of clause are met, if applicable. However, when 1, Fast Payment Procedure, payments will be receipt, the payment due date is the 30th day the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or made within 15 days after the date of receipt after the date of the Contractor’s invoice or legal holiday, the designated payment office of the invoice. payment request, provided the designated may make payment on the following working (d) Overpayments. If the Contractor billing office receives a proper invoice or day without incurring a late payment interest becomes aware of a duplicate payment or payment request and there is no penalty.
VerDate 11
(i) The designated billing office received a (A) The Government owes an interest (a)(3) concerning payments due on proper invoice. penalty of $1 or more; Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays.) (ii) The Government processed a receiving (B) The designated payment office does not (a) Invoice payments—(1) Types of invoice report or other Government documentation pay the interest penalty within 10 days after payments. For purposes of this clause, there authorizing payment and there was no the date the invoice amount is paid; and are several types of invoice payments that disagreement over quantity, quality, (C) The contractor makes a written demand may occur under this contract, as follows: Contractor compliance with any contract to the designated payment office for (i) Progress payments, if provided for term or condition, or requested progress additional penalty payment, in accordance elsewhere in this contract, based on payment amount. with paragraph (a)(6)(ii) of this clause, Contracting Officer approval of the estimated (iii) In the case of a final invoice for any postmarked not later than 40 days after the amount and value of work or services balance of funds due the Contractor for work date the invoice amount is paid. performed, including payments for reaching or services performed, the amount was not (ii)(A) The Contractor shall support written milestones in any project. subject to further contract settlement actions demands for additional penalty payments (A) The due date for making such between the Government and the Contractor. with the following data. The Government payments is 14 days after the designated (4) Computing penalty amount. The will not request any additional data. The billing office receives a proper payment Government will compute the interest Contractor shall— request. If the designated billing office fails penalty in accordance with the Office of (1) Specifically assert that late payment to annotate the payment request with the Management and Budget prompt payment interest is due under a specific invoice, and actual date of receipt at the time of receipt, regulations at 5 CFR part 1315. request payment of all overdue late payment the payment due date is the 14th day after (i) For the sole purpose of computing an interest penalty and such additional penalty the date of the Contractor’s payment request, interest penalty that might be due the as may be required; provided the designated billing office Contractor, Government acceptance or (2) Attach a copy of the invoice on which receives a proper payment request and there approval is deemed to occur constructively the unpaid late payment interest is due; and is no disagreement over quantity, quality, or as shown in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(A) and (B) of (3) State that payment of the principal has Contractor compliance with contract this clause. If actual acceptance or approval been received, including the date of receipt. requirements. occurs within the constructive acceptance or (B) If there is no postmark or the postmark (B) The due date for payment of any approval period, the Government will base is illegible— amounts retained by the Contracting Officer the determination of an interest penalty on (1) The designated payment office that in accordance with the clause at 52.232–5, the actual date of acceptance or approval. receives the demand will annotate it with the Payments Under Fixed-Price Construction Constructive acceptance or constructive date of receipt, provided the demand is Contracts, is as specified in the contract or, approval requirements do not apply if there received on or before the 40th day after if not specified, 30 days after approval by the is a disagreement over quantity, quality, payment was made; or Contracting Officer for release to the Contractor compliance with a contract (2) If the designated payment office fails to Contractor. provision, or requested progress payment make the required annotation, the (ii) Final payments based on completion amounts. These requirements also do not Government will determine the demand’s and acceptance of all work and presentation compel Government officials to accept work validity based on the date the Contractor has of release of all claims against the or services, approve Contractor estimates, placed on the demand, provided such date is perform contract administration functions, or Government arising by virtue of the contract, no later than the 40th day after payment was and payments for partial deliveries that have make payment prior to fulfilling their made. responsibilities. been accepted by the Government (e.g., each (iii) The additional penalty does not apply separate building, public work, or other (A) For work or services completed by the to payments regulated by other Government Contractor, Government acceptance is division of the contract for which the price regulations (e.g., payments under utility is stated separately in the contract). deemed to occur constructively on the 7th contracts subject to tariffs and regulation). day after the Contractor completes the work (A) The due date for making such (b) Contract financing payments. If this payments is the later of the following two or services in accordance with the terms and contract provides for contract financing, the conditions of the contract. events: Government will make contract financing (1) The 30th day after the designated (B) For progress payments, Government payments in accordance with the applicable approval is deemed to occur on the 7th day billing office receives a proper invoice from contract financing clause. the Contractor. after the designated billing office receives the (c) Overpayments. If the Contractor Contractor estimates. (2) The 30th day after Government becomes aware of a duplicate payment or (ii) The prompt payment regulations at 5 acceptance of the work or services completed that the Government has otherwise overpaid CFR 1315.10(c) do not require the by the Contractor. For a final invoice when on an invoice payment, the Contractor shall Government to pay interest penalties if the payment amount is subject to contract immediately notify the Contracting Officer payment delays are due to disagreement settlement actions (e.g., release of claims), and request instructions for disposition of the between the Government and the Contractor acceptance is deemed to occur on the overpayment. over the payment amount or other issues effective date of the contract settlement. involving contract compliance, or on (End of clause) (B) If the designated billing office fails to amounts temporarily withheld or retained in annotate the invoice with the date of actual 52.232–27 Prompt payment for accordance with the terms of the contract. receipt at the time of receipt, the invoice construction contracts. The Government and the Contractor shall payment due date is the 30th day after the resolve claims involving disputes, and any As prescribed in 32.908(b), insert the date of the Contractor’s invoice, provided the interest that may be payable in accordance following clause: designated billing office receives a proper with the clause at FAR 52.233–1, Disputes. invoice and there is no disagreement over Prompt Payment for Construction Contracts (5) Discounts for prompt payment. The quantity, quality, or Contractor compliance (Feb 2002) designated payment office will pay an with contract requirements. interest penalty automatically, without Notwithstanding any other payment terms (2) Contractor’s invoice. The Contractor request from the Contractor, if the in this contract, the Government will make shall prepare and submit invoices to the Government takes a discount for prompt invoice payments under the terms and designated billing office specified in the payment improperly. The Government will conditions specified in this clause. The contract. A proper invoice must include the calculate the interest penalty in accordance Government considers payment as being items listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through with 5 CFR part 1315. made on the day a check is dated or the date (a)(2)(xi) of this clause. If the invoice does (6) Additional interest penalty. (i) The of an electronic funds transfer.Definitions of not comply with these requirements, the designated payment office will pay a penalty pertinent terms are set forth in sections designated billing office must return it within amount, calculated in accordance with the 2.101, 32.001, and 32.902 of the Federal 7 days after receipt, with the reasons why it prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR part Acquisition Regulation. All days referred to is not a proper invoice. When computing any 1315, in addition to the interest penalty in this clause are calendar days, unless interest penalty owed the Contractor, the amount only if— otherwise specified. (However, see paragraph Government will take into account if the
VerDate 11
Government notifies the Contractor of an (iii) In the case of a final invoice for any will not request any additional data. The improper invoice in an untimely manner. balance of funds due the Contractor for work Contractor shall— (i) Name and address of the Contractor. or services performed, the amount was not (1) Specifically assert that late payment (ii) Invoice date and invoice number. (The subject to further contract settlement actions interest is due under a specific invoice, and Contractor should date invoices as close as between the Government and the Contractor. request payment of all overdue late payment possible to the date of mailing or (4) Computing penalty amount. The interest penalty and such additional penalty transmission.) Government will compute the interest as may be required; (iii) Contract number or other authorization penalty in accordance with the Office of (2) Attach a copy of the invoice on which for work or services performed (including Management and Budget prompt payment the unpaid late payment interest was due; order number and contract line item regulations at 5 CFR part 1315. and number). (i) For the sole purpose of computing an (3) State that payment of the principal has (iv) Description of work or services interest penalty that might be due the been received, including the date of receipt. performed. Contractor for payments described in (B) If there is no postmark or the postmark (v) Delivery and payment terms (e.g., paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this clause, is illegible— discount for prompt payment terms). Government acceptance or approval is (1) The designated payment office that (vi) Name and address of Contractor deemed to occur constructively on the 7th receives the demand will annotate it with the official to whom payment is to be sent (must day after the Contractor has completed the date of receipt provided the demand is be the same as that in the contract or in a work or services in accordance with the received on or before the 40th day after proper notice of assignment). terms and conditions of the contract. If actual payment was made; or (vii) Name (where practicable), title, phone acceptance or approval occurs within the (2) If the designated payment office fails to number, and mailing address of person to constructive acceptance or approval period, make the required annotation, the notify in the event of a defective invoice. the Government will base the determination Government will determine the demand’s (viii) For payments described in paragraph of an interest penalty on the actual date of validity based on the date the Contractor has (a)(1)(i) of this clause, substantiation of the acceptance or approval. Constructive placed on the demand, provided such date is amounts requested and certification in acceptance or constructive approval no later than the 40th day after payment was accordance with the requirements of the requirements do not apply if there is a made. clause at 52.232–5, Payments Under Fixed- disagreement over quantity, quality, or (b) Contract financing payments. If this Price Construction Contracts. Contractor compliance with a contract contract provides for contract financing, the (ix) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). provision. These requirements also do not Government will make contract financing The Contractor shall include its TIN on the compel Government officials to accept work payments in accordance with the applicable invoice only if required elsewhere in this or services, approve Contractor estimates, contract financing clause. contract. perform contract administration functions, or (c) Subcontract clause requirements. The (x) Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking make payment prior to fulfilling their Contractor shall include in each subcontract information. responsibilities. for property or services (including a material (A) The Contractor shall include EFT (ii) The prompt payment regulations at 5 supplier) for the purpose of performing this banking information on the invoice only if CFR 1315.10(c) do not require the contract the following: required elsewhere in this contract. (B) If EFT banking information is not Government to pay interest penalties if (1) Prompt payment for subcontractors. A required to be on the invoice, in order for the payment delays are due to disagreement payment clause that obligates the Contractor invoice to be a proper invoice, the Contractor between the Government and the Contractor to pay the subcontractor for satisfactory shall have submitted correct EFT banking over the payment amount or other issues performance under its subcontract not later information in accordance with the involving contract compliance, or on than 7 days from receipt of payment out of applicable solicitation provision (e.g., amounts temporarily withheld or retained in such amounts as are paid to the Contractor 52.232–38, Submission of Electronic Funds accordance with the terms of the contract. under this contract. Transfer Information with Offer), contract The Government and the Contractor shall (2) Interest for subcontractors. An interest clause (e.g., 52.232–33, Payment by resolve claims involving disputes, and any penalty clause that obligates the Contractor to Electronic Funds Transfer—Central interest that may be payable in accordance pay to the subcontractor an interest penalty Contractor Registration, or 52.232–34, with the clause at FAR 52.233–1, Disputes. for each payment not made in accordance Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer— (5) Discounts for prompt payment. The with the payment clause— Other Than Central Contractor Registration), designated payment office will pay an (i) For the period beginning on the day or applicable agency procedures. interest penalty automatically, without after the required payment date and ending (C) EFT banking information is not request from the Contractor, if the on the date on which payment of the amount required if the Government waived the Government takes a discount for prompt due is made; and requirement to pay by EFT. payment improperly. The Government will (ii) Computed at the rate of interest (xi) Any other information or calculate the interest penalty in accordance established by the Secretary of the Treasury, documentation required by the contract. with the prompt payment regulations at 5 and published in the Federal Register, for (3) Interest penalty. The designated CFR part 1315. interest payments under section 12 of the payment office will pay an interest penalty (6) Additional interest penalty. (i) The Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 611) automatically, without request from the designated payment office will pay a penalty in effect at the time the Contractor accrues Contractor, if payment is not made by the amount, calculated in accordance with the the obligation to pay an interest penalty. due date and the conditions listed in prompt payment regulations at 5 CFR part (3) Subcontractor clause flowdown. A paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (a)(3)(iii) of this 1315 in addition to the interest penalty clause requiring each subcontractor tou clause are met, if applicable. However, when amount only if— (i) Include a payment clause and an the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or (A) The Government owes an interest interest penalty clause conforming to the legal holiday, the designated payment office penalty of $1 or more; standards set forth in paragraphs (c)(1) and may make payment on the following working (B) The designated payment office does not (c)(2) of this clause in each of its day without incurring a late payment interest pay the interest penalty within 10 days after subcontracts; and penalty. the date the invoice amount is paid; and (ii) Require each of its subcontractors to (i) The designated billing office received a (C) The Contractor makes a written include such clauses in their subcontracts proper invoice. demand to the designated payment office for with each lower-tier subcontractor or (ii) The Government processed a receiving additional penalty payment, in accordance supplier. report or other Government documentation with paragraph (a)(6)(ii) of this clause, (d) Subcontract clause interpretation. The authorizing payment and there was no postmarked not later than 40 days after the clauses required by paragraph (c) of this disagreement over quantity, quality, date the invoice amount is paid. clause shall not be construed to impair the Contractor compliance with any contract (ii)(A) The Contractor shall support written right of the Contractor or a subcontractor at term or condition, or requested progress demands for additional penalty payments any tier to negotiate, and to include in their payment amount. with the following data. The Government subcontract, provisions that—
VerDate 11
(1) Retainage permitted. Permit the U.S.C. 611) in effect at the time the (g) Written notice of subcontractor Contractor or a subcontractor to retain Contractor accrues the obligation to pay an withholding. The Contractor shall issue a (without cause) a specified percentage of interest penalty; written notice of any withholding to a each progress payment otherwise due to a (5) Notice to Contracting Officer. Notify the subcontractor (with a copy furnished to the subcontractor for satisfactory performance Contracting Officer upon— Contracting Officer), specifying— under the subcontract without incurring any (i) Reduction of the amount of any (1) The amount to be withheld; obligation to pay a late payment interest subsequent certified application for payment; (2) The specific causes for the withholding penalty, in accordance with terms and or under the terms of the subcontract; and conditions agreed to by the parties to the (ii) Payment to the subcontractor of any (3) The remedial actions to be taken by the subcontract, giving such recognition as the withheld amounts of a progress payment, subcontractor in order to receive payment of parties deem appropriate to the ability of a specifying— the amounts withheld. subcontractor to furnish a performance bond (A) The amounts withheld under (h) Subcontractor payment entitlement. and a payment bond; paragraph (e)(1) of this clause; and The Contractor may not request payment (2) Withholding permitted. Permit the (B) The dates that such withholding began from the Government of any amount Contractor or subcontractor to make a and ended; and withheld or retained in accordance with determination that part or all of the (6) Interest to Government. Be obligated to paragraph (d) of this clause until such time subcontractor’s request for payment may be pay to the Government an amount equal to as the Contractor has determined and withheld in accordance with the subcontract interest on the withheld payments (computed certified to the Contracting Officer that the agreement; and in the manner provided in 31 U.S.C. subcontractor is entitled to the payment of (3) Withholding requirements. Permit such 3903(c)(1)), from the 8th day after receipt of such amount. withholding without incurring any obligation the withheld amounts from the Government (i) Prime-subcontractor disputes. A dispute to pay a late payment penalty if— until— between the Contractor and subcontractor (i) A notice conforming to the standards of (i) The day the identified subcontractor relating to the amount or entitlement of a paragraph (g) of this clause previously has performance deficiency is corrected; or subcontractor to a payment or a late payment been furnished to the subcontractor; and (ii) The date that any subsequent payment interest penalty under a clause included in (ii) The Contractor furnishes to the is reduced under paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this the subcontract pursuant to paragraph (c) of Contracting Officer a copy of any notice clause. this clause does not constitute a dispute to issued by a Contractor pursuant to paragraph (f) Third-party deficiency reports—(1) which the Government is a party. The (d)(3)(i) of this clause. Withholding from subcontractor. If a Government may not be interpleaded in any (e) Subcontractor withholding procedures. Contractor, after making payment to a first- judicial or administrative proceeding If a Contractor, after making a request for tier subcontractor, receives from a supplier or involving such a dispute. subcontractor of the first-tier subcontractor payment to the Government but before (j) Preservation of prime-subcontractor (hereafter referred to as a ‘‘second-tier making a payment to a subcontractor for the rights. Except as provided in paragraph (i) of subcontractor’’) a written notice in subcontractor’s performance covered by the this clause, this clause shall not limit or accordance with section 2 of the Act of payment request, discovers that all or a impair any contractual, administrative, or August 24, 1935 (40 U.S.C. 270b, Miller Act), portion of the payment otherwise due such judicial remedies otherwise available to the asserting a deficiency in such first-tier Contractor or a subcontractor in the event of subcontractor is subject to withholding from subcontractor’s performance under the a dispute involving late payment or the subcontractor in accordance with the contract for which the Contractor may be subcontract agreement, then the Contractor ultimately liable, and the Contractor nonpayment by the Contractor or deficient shall— determines that all or a portion of future subcontract performance or nonperformance (1) Subcontractor notice. Furnish to the payments otherwise due such first-tier by a subcontractor. subcontractor a notice conforming to the subcontractor is subject to withholding in (k) Non-recourse for prime contractor standards of paragraph (g) of this clause as accordance with the subcontract agreement, interest penalty. The Contractor’s obligation soon as practicable upon ascertaining the the Contractor may, without incurring an to pay an interest penalty to a subcontractor cause giving rise to a withholding, but prior obligation to pay an interest penalty under pursuant to the clauses included in a to the due date for subcontractor payment; paragraph (e)(6) of this clause— subcontract under paragraph (c) of this clause (2) Contracting Officer notice. Furnish to (i) Furnish to the first-tier subcontractor a shall not be construed to be an obligation of the Contracting Officer, as soon as notice conforming to the standards of the Government for such interest penalty. A practicable, a copy of the notice furnished to paragraph (g) of this clause as soon as cost-reimbursement claim may not include the subcontractor pursuant to paragraph practicable upon making such determination; any amount for reimbursement of such (e)(1) of this clause; and interest penalty. (3) Subcontractor progress payment (ii) Withhold from the first-tier (l) Overpayments. If the Contractor reduction. Reduce the subcontractor’s subcontractor’s next available progress becomes aware of a duplicate payment or progress payment by an amount not to payment or payments an amount not to that the Government has otherwise overpaid exceed the amount specified in the notice of exceed the amount specified in the notice of on an invoice payment, the Contractor shall withholding furnished under paragraph (e)(1) withholding furnished under paragraph immediately notify the Contracting Officer of this clause; (f)(1)(i) of this clause. and request instructions for disposition of the (4) Subsequent subcontractor payment. Pay (2) Subsequent payment or interest charge. overpayment. the subcontractor as soon as practicable after As soon as practicable, but not later than 7 (End of clause) the correction of the identified subcontract days after receipt of satisfactory written 16. Amend section 52.232–29 by performance deficiency, and— notification that the identified subcontract (i) Make such payment within— revising the date of the clause; by performance deficiency has been corrected, redesignating paragraph (g) as paragraph (A) Seven days after correction of the the Contractor shall— identified subcontract performance (i) Pay the amount withheld under (h); by adding a new paragraph (g); and deficiency (unless the funds therefor must be paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this clause to such first- by revising the newly designated recovered from the Government because of a tier subcontractor; or paragraph (h) to read as follows: reduction under paragraph (e)(5)(i)) of this (ii) Incur an obligation to pay a late clause; or payment interest penalty to such first-tier 52.232–29 Terms for financing of (B) Seven days after the Contractor subcontractor computed at the rate of interest purchases of commercial items. recovers such funds from the Government; or established by the Secretary of the Treasury, * * * * * (ii) Incur an obligation to pay a late and published in the Federal Register, for payment interest penalty computed at the interest payments under section 12 of the Terms for Financing of Purchases of rate of interest established by the Secretary Contracts DisputesAct of 1978 (41 U.S.C. Commercial Items (Feb 2002) of the Treasury, and published in the Federal 611) in effect at the time the Contractor * * * * * Register, for interest payments under section accrues the obligation to pay an interest (g) Dates for payment. A payment under 12 of the Contracts Disputes Act of 1978 (41 penalty. this clause is a contract financing payment
VerDate 11
and not subject to the interest penalty SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency B. Regulatory Flexibility Act provisions of the Prompt Payment Act. The Acquisition Council and the Defense designated payment office will pay approved The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 Acquisition Regulations Council U.S.C. 601, et seq., applies to this final payment requests within 30 days of submittal (Councils) have agreed on a final rule of a proper request for payment. rule. The Councils prepared a Final (h) Conflict between terms of offeror and amending the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), clause. In the event of any conflict between Regulation to implement changes in 41 and it is summarized as follows: the terms proposed by the offeror in response CFR 51–5.2(e) relating to preferences for The rule implements 41 CFR 51–5.2(e) to an invitation to propose financing terms award of subcontracts under service relating to preferences for award of (52.232–31) and the terms in this clause, the contracts to nonprofit workshops subcontracts under service contracts to terms of this clause shall govern. designated by the Committee for nonprofit workshops designated by the (End of clause) Purchase From People Who Are Blind Committee for Purchase From People Who 17. Amend section 52.232–32 by or Severely Disabled (Javits-Wagner- Are Blind or Severely Disabled (Javits- revising the date of the clause and O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 U.S.C. 48)). Wagner-O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 U.S.C. 48)). paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows: DATES: Effective Date: February 19, The rule will apply to all large and small 2002. entities that seek award of a subcontract 52.232–32 Performance-based payments. under Government services contract. * * * * * FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Although awards of subcontracts to certain FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS small entities may decrease as a result of the Performance-Based Payments (Feb 2002) Building, Washington, DC, 20405, at rule, the decrease will be offset by an * * * * * (202) 501–4755 for information increase in awards to nonprofit workshops. (c) * * * Nonprofit workshops meet the size standards pertaining to status or publication for most acquisitions. Therefore, we do not (2) A payment under this performance- schedules. For clarification of content, based payment clause is a contract financing expect the total number of subcontract payment under the Prompt Payment clause of contact Ms. Linda Nelson, Procurement awards to small entities to change as a result this contract and not subject to the interest Analyst, at (202) 501–1900. Please cite of this rule. penalty provisions of the Prompt Payment FAC 2001–02, FAR case 1999–017. Interested parties may obtain a copy Act. The designated payment office will pay SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of the FRFA from the FAR Secretariat. llll approved requests on the The FAR Secretariat has submitted a [Contracting Officer insert day as prescribed A. Background by agency head; if not prescribed, insert copy of the FRFA to the Chief Counsel ‘‘30th’’] day after receipt of the request for DoD, GSA, and NASA published a for Advocacy of the Small Business performance-based payment. However, the proposed rule in the Federal Register at Administration. 65 FR 41266 on July 3, 2000. This final designated payment office is not required to C. Paperwork Reduction Act provide payment if the Contracting Officer rule amends FAR Part 8 to extend the requires substantiation as provided in priority for award of service contracts The Paperwork Reduction Act does paragraph (c)(1) of this clause, or inquires that will satisfy agency requirements not apply because the changes to the into the status of an event or performance that are available from the Committee FAR do not impose information criterion, or into any of the conditions listed for Purchase From People Who Are collection requirements that require the in paragraph (e) of this clause, or into the Blind or Severely Disabled to approval of the Office of Management Contractor certification. The payment period will not begin until the Contracting Officer subcontracts when contractors purchase and Budget approval under 44 U.S.C. approves the request. the services for Government use. The 3501, et seq. rule also amends FAR Part 44 to add * * * * * List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 8, 44, purchase from nonprofit workshops and 52 [FR Doc. 01–30540 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] designated by the Committee for BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P Purchase From People Who Are Blind Government procurement. or Severely Disabled to the list of items Dated: December 5, 2001. a contracting officer must consider Al Matera, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE when reviewing a subcontract that is Director, Acquisition Policy Division. subject to the procedures at FAR GENERAL SERVICES Subpart 44.2, Consent to Subcontracts. Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA ADMINISTRATION The rule also amends the clause at FAR amend 48 CFR parts 8, 44, and 52 as set 52.208–9, Contractor Use of Mandatory forth below: NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Sources of Supply, to inform offerors 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR SPACE ADMINISTRATION and contractors that certain services to parts 8, 44, and 52 continues to read as be provided for use by the Government follows: 48 CFR Parts 8, 44, and 52 are required by law to be obtained from Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and42 U.S.C. 2473(c). [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 1999–017; Item the Committee for Purchase From IV] People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. We received comments from PART 8—REQUIRED SOURCES OF RIN 9000–AI82 three respondents in response to SUPPLIES AND SERVICES publication of the proposed rule. All Federal Acquisition Regulation; Javits- 2. Amend section 8.001 by revising comments were considered in the paragraph (c) to read as follows: Wagner-O’Day Act Subcontract development of the final rule. Preference Under Service Contracts This is not a significant regulatory 8.001 Priorities for use of Government supply sources. AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), action and, therefore, was not subject to General Services Administration (GSA), review under Section 6(b) of Executive * * * * * and National Aeronautics and Space Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and (c) The statutory obligation for Administration (NASA). Review, dated September 30, 1993. This Government agencies to satisfy their rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. requirements for supplies or services ACTION: Final rule. 804. available from the Committee for
VerDate 11
Purchase From People Who Are Blind Wagner-O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 U.S.C. 48). Ralph DeStefano, Procurement Analyst, or Severely Disabled also applies when Additionally, certain of these supplies are at (202) 501–1758. Please cite FAC contractors purchase the supplies or available from the Defense Logistics Agency 2001–02, FAR case 1999–022. (DLA), the General Services Administration services for Government use. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (GSA), or the Department of Veterans Affairs 3. Revise section 8.003 to read as (VA). The Contractor shall obtain mandatory A. Background follows: supplies or services to be provided for Government use under this contract from the This final rule amends FAR 15.306(d) 8.003 Contract clause. specific sources indicated in the contract to clarify that the contracting officer is Insert the clause at 52.208–9, schedule. not required to discuss every area where Contractor Use of Mandatory Sources of (b) The Contractor shall immediately notify the proposal could be improved. The Supply and Services, in solicitations the Contracting Officer if a mandatory source rule explains that discussions of and contracts that require a contractor to is unable to provide the supplies or services offerors’ proposals beyond deficiencies provide supplies or services for by the time required, or if the quality of and significant weaknesses are a matter Government use that are available from supplies or services provided by the of contracting officer judgment. GAO the Committee for Purchase From mandatory source is unsatisfactory. The has already interpreted the previous Contractor shall not purchase the supplies or People Who Are Blind or Severely services from other sources until the FAR language consistently with this Disabled. The contracting officer must Contracting Officer has notified the clarification in MRC Federal, Inc. (B– identify in the contract schedule the Contractor that the Committee or a JWOD 280969, December 14, 1998), and Du & supplies or services that must be central nonprofit agency has authorized Associates (B–280283.3, December 22, purchased from a mandatory source and purchase from other sources. 1998). The rule encourages the the specific source. (c) * * * For mandatory supplies or contracting officer to discuss other services that are not available from DLA/ aspects of an offerors’ proposal that PART 44—SUBCONTRACTING GSA/VA, price and delivery information is have the potential, if changed, to POLICIES AND PROCEDURES available from the appropriate central materially increase the value of the nonprofit agency. * * * proposal to the Government (B– 4. Amend section 44.202–2 by * * * * * 280283.3). However, the rule makes removing from the introductory text of (End of clause) clear that whether these discussions paragraph (a) ‘‘shall’’ and adding [FR Doc. 01–30541 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] would be worthwhile is within the ‘‘must’’ in its place; and by revising BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P contracting officer’s discretion. paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows: DoD, GSA, and NASA published a 44.202–2 Considerations. proposed rule in the Federal Register at (a) * * * DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 65 FR 17582, April 3, 2000. Five (4) Has the contractor complied with respondents submitted comments on the GENERAL SERVICES the prime contract requirements proposed rule. The Councils considered ADMINISTRATION regarding— all comments in the development of the (i) Small business subcontracting, final rule. including, if applicable, its plan for NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND This is not a significant regulatory subcontracting with small, veteran- SPACE ADMINISTRATION action, and therefore, was not subject to owned, service-disabled veteran-owned, review under Section 6(b) of Executive HUBZone, small disadvantaged and 48 CFR Part 15 Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and women-owned small business concerns [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 1999–022; Item Review, dated September 30, 1993. This (seepart 19); and V] rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. (ii) Purchase from nonprofit agencies 804. RIN 9000–AI68 designated by the Committee for B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Purchase From People Who Are Blind Federal Acquisition Regulation; The Department of Defense, the or Severely Disabled (Javits-Wagner- Discussion Requirements O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 U.S.C. 48))(see General Services Administration, and part 8)? AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration certify that this final * * * * * General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space rule will not have a significant PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS Administration (NASA). economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the AND CONTRACT CLAUSES ACTION: Final rule. meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility 5. In section 52.208–9, revise the SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the section and clause headings, paragraphs Acquisition Council and the Defense rule only clarifies existing policy that (a) and (b), and the second sentence in Acquisition Regulations Council the scope and extent of discussions paragraph (c) to read as follows: (Councils) have agreed to amend the beyond the stated minimums are a Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to matter of contracting officer judgment. 52.208–9 Contractor Use of Mandatory We did not receive any comments Sources of Supply or Services. clarify the scope of discussions in competitive negotiated acquisitions. regarding this determination as a result * * * * * DATES: Effective Date: February 19, of publication of the proposed rule in Contractor Use of Mandatory Sources of 2002. the Federal Register at 65 FR 17582, Supply or Services (Feb 2002) April 3, 2000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The (a) Certain supplies or services to be C. Paperwork Reduction Act provided under this contract for use by the FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Government are required by law to be Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) The Paperwork Reduction Act does obtained from the Committee for Purchase 501–4755, for information pertaining to not apply because the changes to the From People Who Are Blind or Severely status or publication schedules. For FAR do not impose information Disabled (the Committee) under the Javits- clarification of content, contact Mr. collection requirements that require the
VerDate 11
approval of the Office of Management excesses were removed and the offered definitions of ‘‘buy item’’ and ‘‘make and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et price decreased. item’’ in section 15.407–2, Make-or-buy seq. * * * * * programs. As defined in section 15.407– 2, ‘‘buy item’’ means an item or work List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 15 [FR Doc. 01–30542 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P effort to be produced or performed by a Government procurement. subcontractor. ‘‘Make item’’ means an item or work effort to be produced or Dated: December 5, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE performed by the prime contractor or its Al Matera, affiliates, subsidiaries, or divisions. In Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division. GENERAL SERVICES this context, a transfer of commercial ADMINISTRATION items between divisions, subsidiaries, or Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA affiliates of a contractor is not amend 48 CFR part 15 as set forth NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND considered to be a ‘‘subcontract.’’ This below: SPACE ADMINISTRATION is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to Office PART 15—CONTRACTING BY 48 CFR Part 15 of Management and Budget review NEGOTIATION [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 2000–017; Item under Section 6(b) of Executive Order VI] 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR dated September 30, 1993. This rule is part 15 continues to read as follows: RIN 9000–AJ25 not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Federal Acquisition Regulation; B. Regulatory Flexibility Act chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). Definition of Subcontract in FAR Subpart 15.4 The final rule does not constitute a 2. Amend section 15.306 in paragraph significant FAR revision within the (d)(1) by removing ‘‘shall’’ and inserting AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), meaning of FAR 1.501 and Public Law ‘‘must’’ in its place; by revising General Services Administration (GSA), 98–577, and publication for public paragraph (d)(3); and by redesignating and National Aeronautics and Space comment is not required. paragraph (d)(4) as (d)(5) and adding a Administration (NASA). new (d)(4) to read as follows: However, the Councils will consider ACTION: Final rule. comments from small entities 15.306 Exchanges with offerors after SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency concerning the affected FAR part 15 in receipt of proposals. Acquisition Council and the Defense accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested * * * * * Acquisition Regulations Council parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 601, (d) * * * (Councils) have agreed on a final rule amending the Federal Acquisition et seq. (FAC 2001–02, FAR case 2000– (3) At a minimum, the contracting Regulation (FAR) to exclude section 017), in correspondence. officer must, subject to paragraphs (d)(5) 15.407–2 from application of the C. Paperwork Reduction Act and (e) of this section and 15.307(a), expanded definition of ‘‘subcontract’’ at indicate to, or discuss with, each offeror FAR 15.401. The Paperwork Reduction Act does still being considered for award, DATES: Effective Date: February 19, not apply because the changes to the deficiencies, significant weaknesses, 2002. FAR do not impose information and adverse past performance collection requirements that require the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The information to which the offeror has not approval of the Office of Management FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS yet had an opportunity to respond. The and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) contracting officer also is encouraged to seq. discuss other aspects of the offeror’s 501–4755, for information pertaining to proposal that could, in the opinion of status or publication schedules. For List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 15 clarification of content, contact Mr. the contracting officer, be altered or Government procurement. explained to enhance materially the Jeremy Olson, at (202) 501–3221. Please proposal’s potential for award. cite FAC 2001–02, FAR case 2000–017. Dated: December 5, 2001. However, the contracting officer is not SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Al Matera, required to discuss every area where the A. Background Director, Federal Acquisition Policy Division. proposal could be improved. The scope This final rule excludes section Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA and extent of discussions are a matter of 15.407–2 from application of the amend 48 CFR part 15 as set forth contracting officer judgment. expanded definition of ‘‘subcontract’’ at below: (4) In discussing other aspects of the FAR 15.401. This definition of proposal, the Government may, in ‘‘subcontract’’ is derived from the Truth PART 15—CONTRACTING BY situations where the solicitation stated in Negotiations Act (10 U.S.C. NEGOTIATION that evaluation credit would be given 2306a(h)(2) and 41 U.S.C. 254b(h)(2)). for technical solutions exceeding any Prior to the rewrite of Part 15, this 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR mandatory minimums, negotiate with definition applied only to Subpart 15.8, part 15 continues to read as follows: offerors for increased performance Price Negotiation, and did not apply to Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. beyond any mandatory minimums, and Subpart 15.7, Make-or-Buy Programs, or chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). the Government may suggest to offerors Subpart 15.9, Profit. The rewrite 15.401 [Amended] that have exceeded any mandatory combined these three subparts into the minimums (in ways that are not integral new Subpart 15.4, Contract Pricing. 2. Amend section 15.401 in the to the design), that their proposals However, application of the expanded definition of ‘‘Subcontract’’ by adding would be more competitive if the definition creates a conflict with the the parenthetical ‘‘(except as used in
VerDate 11
15.407–2)’’ following the word updates the Internet address for the PART 19—SMALL BUSINESS ‘‘Subcontract’’. industry size standards published by the PROGRAMS [FR Doc. 01–30543 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Small Business Administration. FAR 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 19.1005(a) reinstates language omitted inadvertently. part 19 continues to read as follows: An interim rule was published in FAC Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 97–19 in the Federal Register at 65 FR chapter 137; and42 U.S.C. 2473(c). 46055, July 26, 2000, to conform the GENERAL SERVICES 2. In section 19.102, revise paragraph FAR to the changes issued by SBA to ADMINISTRATION (h) to read as follows: the size standards and convert other programs in the FAR currently based on 19.102 Size standards. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SIC codes to NAICS. Two comments * * * * * SPACE ADMINISTRATION were received in response to the interim (h) The industry size standards are rule. Those comments were considered published by the Small Business 48 CFR Parts 5, 12, 19, 23, 52, and 53 in formulation of the final rule. Administration and are available via the Internet at http://www.sba.gov/size. [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 2000–604; Item This is not a significant regulatory VII] action, and therefore, was not subject to 19.1005 [Amended] RIN 9000–AI75 review under Section 6(b) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 3. Amend section 19.1005 in the Federal Acquisition Regulation; North Review, dated September 30, 1993. This heading of the table in paragraph (a) by American Industry Classification rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. removing ‘‘Construction’’ and adding System 804. ‘‘Construction (except dredging)’’ in its place. AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), B. Regulatory Flexibility Act General Services Administration (GSA), [FR Doc. 01–30544 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] and National Aeronautics and Space The Department of Defense, the BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P Administration (NASA). General Services Administration, and ACTION: Final rule. the National Aeronautics and Space Administration certify that this final DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency rule will not have a significant Acquisition Council and the Defense economic impact on a substantial GENERAL SERVICES Acquisition Regulations Council number of small entities within the ADMINISTRATION (Councils) are finalizing, with minor meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility changes, the interim rule concerning the Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND North American Industry Classification coding changes are primarily internal to SPACE ADMINISTRATION System (NAICS), that was published in the Federal Government. External uses the Federal Register at 65 FR 46055, of the codes under the small business 48 CFR Parts 22, 25, and 52 July 26, 2000. The rule converts size subcontracting program and small [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 2001–025; Item standards and other programs in the disadvantaged business participation VIII] Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) programs are primarily limited to large based on the Standard Industrial businesses and involve only use of RIN 9000–AJ26 Classification (SIC) system to NAICS. NAICS rather than SIC tables. Federal Acquisition Regulation; DATES: Effective Date: December 18, C. Paperwork Reduction Act Iceland—Newly Designated Country 2001. Under the Trade Agreements Act FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The The Paperwork Reduction Act does AGENCIES: FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS not apply because the changes to the Department of Defense (DoD), Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) FAR do not impose information General Services Administration (GSA), 501–4755, for information pertaining to collection requirements that require the and National Aeronautics and Space status or publication schedules. For approval of the Office of Management Administration (NASA). clarification of content, contact Ms. and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et ACTION: Final rule. Rhonda Cundiff, Procurement Analyst, seq. SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency at (202) 501–0044. Please cite FAC List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 5, 12, Acquisition Council and the Defense 2001–02, FAR case 2000–604. 19, 23, 52, and 53 Acquisition Regulations Council SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (Councils) have agreed on a final rule Government procurement. A. Background amending the Federal Acquisition Dated: December 5, 2001. Regulation (FAR) to implement the NAICS is a new system that classifies Al Matera, accession of Iceland to the Agreement establishments according to how they Director, Acquisition Policy Division. on Government Procurement, by adding conduct their economic activity. It is a Iceland as a designated country under significant improvement over the SIC. Interim Rule Adopted as Final With the Trade Agreements Act. On May 15, 2000, the Small Business Minor Changes DATES: Administration (SBA) published a final Effective Date: December 18, rule basing small business size Accordingly, DoD, GSA, and NASA 2001. standards on NAICS rather than SIC adopt the interim rule amending 48 CFR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The codes effective the start of the Federal parts 5, 12, 19, 23, 52, and 53, which FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Government’s fiscal year 2001. was published in the Federal Register at Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) In addition, this rule includes two 65 FR 46055, July 26, 2000, as a final 501–4755, for information pertaining to technical amendments. FAR 19.102(h) rule with the following changes: status or publication schedules. For
VerDate 11
clarification of content, contact Ms. Dated: December 5, 2001. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Cecelia Davis, Procurement Analyst, at Al Matera, (202) 219–0202. Please cite FAC 2001– Director, Acquisition Policy Division. GENERAL SERVICES 02, FAR case 2001–025. ADMINISTRATION Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: amend 48 CFR parts 22, 25, and 52 as NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND A. Background set forth below: SPACE ADMINISTRATION 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 48 CFR Part 39 This final rule amends FAR 25.003, parts 22, 25, and 52 continues to read the clause at FAR 52.225–5, Trade as follows: [FAC 2001–02; FAR Case 2000–609; Item Agreements, and the clause at 52.225– IX] 11, Buy American Act—Balance of Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Payments Program—Construction chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). RIN 9000–AJ11 Materials under Trade Agreements, to PART 22—APPLICATION OF LABOR Federal Acquisition Regulation; add Iceland to the list of designated LAWS TO GOVERNMENT Contractor Personnel in the countries under the Trade Agreements ACQUISITIONS Procurement of Information Act (TAA). Technology Services In addition, if the TAA applies, 22.1503 [Amended] AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), Executive Order 13126 of June 12, 1999, 2. In section 22.1503, amend General Services Administration (GSA), Prohibition of Acquisition of paragraph (b)(4) by adding ‘‘Iceland,’’ and National Aeronautics and Space ProductsProduced by Forced or after ‘‘Hong Kong,’’. Administration (NASA). Indentured Child Labor, does not apply ACTION: Final rule. to contracts for the acquisition of PART 25—FOREIGN ACQUISITION products from foreign countries that are SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency party to the Agreement on Government 25.003 [Amended] Acquisition Council and the Defense Procurement. Therefore, this final rule Acquisition Regulations Council 3. In section 25.003, amend the also adds Iceland to the list of excepted (Councils) have agreed to adopt as final, definition ‘‘Designated country’’ by countries of origin at 22.1503(b)(4) and without change, the interim rule adding, in alphabetical order, the word the associated clause at 52.222–19, published as Item II of Federal ‘‘Iceland’’. Child Labor—Cooperation with Acquisition Circular 97–25 published in Authorities and Remedies. the Federal Register on May 2, 2001. PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS The rule amends the Federal This is not a significant regulatory AND CONTRACT CLAUSES Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to action, and therefore, was not subject to 52.222–19 [Amended] implement Section 813 of the Floyd D. review under Section 6(b) of Executive Spence National Defense Authorization Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 4. In section 52.222–19, revise the Act for fiscal year 2001 (Pub. L. 106– Review, dated September 30, 1993. This date of the clause by removing ‘‘(FEB 398). The Act requires that the FAR be rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 2001)’’ and adding ‘‘(DEC 2001)’’ in its amended to address the use, in the 804. place; and in paragraph (a)(4) remove procurement of information technology services, of requirements regarding the B. Regulatory Flexibility Act ‘‘Hong Kong,’’ and add ‘‘Hong Kong, Iceland,’’ in its place. experience and education of contractor This final rule does not constitute a personnel. significant FAR revision within the 52.225–5 [Amended] DATES: Effective Date: December 18, 2001. meaning of FAR 1.501 and Public Law 5. In section 52.225–5, revise the date 98–577, and publication for public of the clause by removing ‘‘(APR 2000)’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The comment is not required. However, the and adding ‘‘(DEC 2001)’’ in its place; FAR Secretariat, Room 4035, GS Councils will consider comments from and in paragraph (a) in the definition Building, Washington, DC, 20405, (202) small entities concerning the affected ‘‘Designated country’’ add, in 501–4755, for information pertaining to FAR part 25 in accordance with 5 U.S.C. alphabetical order, the word ‘‘Iceland’’. status or publication schedules. For 610. Interested parties must submit such clarification of content, contact Ms. comments separately and should cite 5 52.225–11 [Amended] Linda Nelson, Procurement Analyst, at U.S.C. 601, et seq. (FAC 2001–02, FAR (202) 501–1900. Please cite FAC 2001– case 2001–025), in correspondence. 6. In section 52.225–11, revise the 02, FAR case 2000–609. date of the clause by removing ‘‘(FEB SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: C. Paperwork Reduction Act 2000)’’ and adding ‘‘(DEC 2001)’’ in its place; and in paragraph (a) in the A. Background The Paperwork Reduction Act does definition ‘‘Designated country,’’ add, in DoD, GSA, and NASA published an not apply because the changes to the alphabetical order, the word ‘‘Iceland’’. interim rule in the Federal Register at FAR do not impose information 66 FR 22084, May 2, 2001, adding a new [FR Doc. 01–30545 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] collection requirements that require the subsection to Subpart 39.1 to implement approval of the Office of Management BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P Section 813 of the Floyd D. Spence and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et National Defense Authorization Act for seq. fiscal year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–398). List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 22, 25, Section 813 prohibits the use of and 52 minimum experience or education requirements for contractor personnel in Government procurement. solicitations for the acquisition of
VerDate 11
information technology services, The rule will apply to all large and small DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE unless— entities that seek award of Federal 1. The contracting officer first information service contracts. In fiscal year GENERAL SERVICES 2000, we estimated that Federal agencies ADMINISTRATION determines that the needs of the agency awarded approximately 14,578 contracts cannot be met without such totaling approximately $3.4 billion to small requirement; or NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND entities for information technology services. SPACE ADMINISTRATION 2. The needs of the agency require the The rule should have a positive economic use of a type of contract other than a impact on small businesses because it will 48 CFR Chapter 1 performance-based contract. make it easier for them to hire employees to Public comments were received from work on information technology service contracts, as well as increase their business Federal Acquisition Regulation; Small two sources. The comments were opportunities in obtaining Federal contracts. Entity Compliance Guide considered in developing the final rule. The interim rule is converted to a final Interested parties may obtain a copy AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), rule without change. of the FRFA from the FAR Secretariat. General Services Administration (GSA), This is not a significant regulatory The FAR Secretariat has submitted a and National Aeronautics and Space action, and therefore, was not subject to copy of the FRFA to the Chief Counsel Administration (NASA). review under Section 6(b) of Executive for Advocacy of the Small Business ACTION: Small Entity Compliance Guide. Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Administration. SUMMARY: Review, dated September 30, 1993. This C. Paperwork Reduction Act This document is issued rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. under the joint authority of the 804. The Paperwork Reduction Act does Secretary of Defense, the Administrator not apply because the changes to the of General Services and the B. Regulatory Flexibility Act FAR do not impose information Administrator for the National collection requirements that require the The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 Aeronautics and Space Administration. approval of the Office of Management U.S.C. 601, et seq., applies to this final This Small Entity Compliance Guide has and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et rule. The Councils prepared a Final been prepared in accordance with seq. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) Section 212 of the Small Business and it is summarized as follows List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 39 Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–121). It consists This rule amends Part 39 of the Federal Government procurement. of a summary of rules appearing in Acquisition Regulation to implement Section Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 813 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Dated: December 5, 2001. 2001–02 which amend the FAR. An Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 (Pub. Al Matera, L. 106–398). The objective of this rule is to Director, Acquisition Policy Division. asterisk (*) next to a rule indicates that revise the FAR to address the use of a regulatory flexibility analysis has been requirements regarding the experience and Interim Rule Adopted as Final Without prepared in accordance with 5 U.S.C. education of contractor personnel when Change 604. Interested parties may obtain acquiring information technology services. further information regarding these Accordingly, DoD, GSA, and NASA The rule prohibits the use of minimum rules by referring to FAC 2001–02 experience or education requirements for adopt the interim rule amending 48 CFR which precedes this document. These contractor personnel in solicitations for the part 39, which was published in the documents are also available via the acquisition of information technology Federal Register on May 2, 2001 (66 FR Internet at http://www.arnet.gov/far. services, unless the contracting officer first 22084), as a final rule without change. determines the needs of the agency cannot be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Laurie Duarte, FAR Secretariat, (202) met without that requirement; or the needs chapter 137; and42 U.S.C. 2473(c). of the agency require the use of a type of 501–4225. For clarification of content, contract other than a performance-based [FR Doc. 01–30546 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] contact the analyst whose name appears contract. BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P in the table below.
LIST OF RULES IN FAC 2001–02
Item Subject FAR case Analyst
I ...... Definitions of ‘‘Component’’ and ‘‘End Product’’ ...... 2000–015 Davis. II ...... Energy Efficiency of Supplies and Services ...... 1999–011 Smith. III ...... Prompt Payment and the Recovery of Overpayment ...... 1999–023 Olson. IV * ...... Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act Subcontract Preference Under Service Con- 1999–017 Nelson. tracts. V ...... Discussion Requirements ...... 1999–022 DeStefano. VI ...... Definition of Subcontract in FAR Subpart 15.4 ...... 2000–017 Olson. VII ...... North American Industry Classification System ...... 2000–604 Cundiff. VIII ...... Iceland—Newly Designated Country under Trade Agreements Act ...... 2001–025 Davis. IX * ...... Contractor Personnel in the Procurement of Information Technology 2000–609 Nelson. Services.
VerDate 11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: • Government payment offices and beyond the minimum elements stated in Summaries for each FAR rule follow. contractors since it revises the the FAR are a matter of contracting For the actual revisions and/or information that must be on an invoice officer judgment. amendments to these FAR cases, refer to for the document to be considered a Item VI—Definition of Subcontract in the specific item number and subject set proper invoice with respect to the FAR Subpart 15.4 (FAR Case 2000–017) forth in the documents following these prompt payment provisions of the FAR; item summaries. • Contracting officers and contractors This final rule amends FAR 15.401 to Federal Acquisition Circular 2001–02 since it establishes the requirement in exclude section 15.407–2, Make-or-buy amends the FAR as specified below: the prompt payment clauses for programs, from application of the contractors to notify the contracting expanded definition of ‘‘subcontract’’ at Item I—Definitions of ‘‘Component’’ officer if the contractor becomes aware FAR 15.401. This rule is a clarification and ‘‘End Product’’ (FAR Case 2000– of an overpayment of an invoice; and and does not change any policy in 015) • All Government contracts Subpart 15.4, Contract Pricing. This final rule amends the FAR to (including contracts at or below the Item VII—North American Industry restore the unique Part 25 definitions of simplified acquisition threshold) except Classification System (FAR Case 2000– ‘‘component’’ and ‘‘end product’’ for contracts with payment terms and late 604) acquisition of supplies. In addition, the payment penalties established by other Councils have made minor revisions to governmental authority (e.g., tariffs). This rule finalizes, with minor the definitions of ‘‘component’’ and changes, the interim rule which Item IV—Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act ‘‘cost of components’’ for acquisition of amended the FAR to convert size Subcontract Preference Under Service construction. These definitions are used standards and other programs in the Contracts (FAR Case 1999–017) by offerors to determine whether offered FAR that were based on the Standard end products or construction material This final rule amends the FAR to add Industrial Classification (SIC) system to meet the requirements of the Buy a new preference for award of the North AmericanIndustry American Act and Balance of Payments subcontracts under service contracts to Classification System (NAICS). NAICS Program or trade agreements. nonprofit workshops designated by the is a new system that classifies Committee for Purchase From People establishments according to how they Item II—Energy Efficiency of Supplies Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled conduct their economic activity. It is a and Services (FAR Case 1999–011) (Javits-Wagner-O’Day Act (JWOD) (41 significant improvement over the SIC This final rule amends the FAR to U.S.C. 48)). The final rule applies to all system because it more accurately implement Executive Order 13123, service contracts. The rule— identifies industries. Since October 1, Greening the Government through • Requires that contractors that 2000, NAICS is to be used to establish Efficient Energy Management. The provide services for the Government’s the size standards for acquisitions. In rule— use and subcontract for those services addition, the designated industry groups • Requires contracting officers, when must give preference in awarding in FAR 19.1005 have been converted to acquiring energy-using products, to buy subcontracts to nonprofit workshops, if NAICS and contract actions will be energy-efficient products if life-cycle the services are on the Committee for reported using the NAICS code rather cost-effective and available; Purchase From People Who Are Blind than the SIC code. • Directs contracting officers to or Severely Disabled procurement list; Item VIII—Iceland—Newly Designated • Requires that contracting officers Internet sources for more detailed Country Under Trade Agreements Act must consider the preference for information on ENERGY STAR and (FAR Case 2001–025) other energy-efficient products; and subcontracting with nonprofit • Provides guidance on energy- workshops when reviewing a This final rule amends the definition savings performance contracts (ESPCs), subcontract for services that is subject to of ‘‘Designated country’’ at FAR 25.003, including— the procedures at FAR Subpart 44.2, and the clause at 52.225–5, Trade • An explanation of what they are Consent to Subcontracts; and Agreements, and the clause at 52.225– and when they should be used; and • Amends the clause at FAR 52.208– 11, Buy American Act—Balance of • Procedures for the solicitation and 9, ContractorUse of Mandatory Sources Payments Program—Construction award of ESPCs, and the evaluation of of Supply, to inform offerors and Materials under Trade Agreements, to unsolicited proposals for ESPCs. contractors that certain services to be add Iceland to the list of designated The rule will only affect contracting provided for use by the Government are countries under the Trade Agreements officers that— required by law to be obtained from the Act (TAA). Contracting officers may • Acquire energy-using products or Committee for Purchase From People now consider offers of end products or services;—Contract for design, Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. construction materials from Iceland in construction, renovation, or acquisitions subject to the TAA. The Item V—Discussion Requirements (FAR maintenance of a public building that current TAA threshold for acquisition of Case 1999–022) will include energy-using products; or supplies is $177,000 and for acquisition • Use an energy-savings performance The rule amends FAR 15.306(d) to of construction is$6,806,000. contract to reduce energy use and cost clarify that, although the contracting In addition, if the TAA applies, in an agency’s facilities or operations. officer must discuss deficiencies, Executive Order 13126 of June 12, 1999, significant weaknesses, and adverse past Prohibition of Acquisition of Products Item III—Prompt Payment and the performance information to which the Produced by Forced or Indentured Child Recovery of Overpayment (FAR Case offeror has not yet had an opportunity Labor, does not apply to contracts for 1999–023) to respond and is encouraged to discuss the acquisition of products from foreign This final rule revises prompt other aspects of the offeror’s proposal, countries that are party to the payment policies at FAR Part 32, the contracting officer is not required to Agreement on Government Contract Financing, and related contract discuss every area where the proposal Procurement. Therefore, this final rule provisions at FAR Part 52. The rule is could be improved. This clarifies the also adds Iceland to the list of excepted applicable to— existing policy that any discussions countries of origin at 22.1503(b)(4) and
VerDate 11
the associated clause at 52.222–19, rule added a new section to Subpart the agency cannot be met without such Child Labor—Cooperation with 39.1 to implement Section 813 of the requirement; or (2) the needs of the Authorities and Remedies. Floyd D. Spence National Defense agency require the use of a type of Item IX—Contractor Personnel in the Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001 contract other than a performance-based Procurement of Information (Pub. L. 106–398). Section 813 prohibits contract. Technology Services (FAR Case 2000– the use of minimum experience or Dated: December 5, 2001. education requirements for contractor 609) Al Matera, personnel in solicitations for the This final rule converts the interim acquisition of information technology Director, Acquisition Policy Division. rule published in FAC 97–25, in the [FR Doc. 01–30547 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Federal Register at 66 FR 22084, May 2, services, unless (1) the contracting BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 2001, to a final rule without change. The officer first determines that the needs of
VerDate 11
Part IV
Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Occupant Crash Protection; Final Rule
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Protection, to require that future air bags be designed so that, compared to current National Highway Traffic Safety Table of Contents air bags, they create less risk of serious Administration I. Background: The Advanced Air Bag Final air bag-induced injuries, particularly for Rule small women and young children; and 49 CFR Part 571 II. Petitions for Reconsideration provide improved frontal crash III. Summary of Response to Petitions [Docket No. NHTSA 01–11110; Notice 1] protection for all occupants, by means IV. Issues Related to Improving the that include advanced air bag RIN 2127–AI10 Protection of Occupants in Serious Crashes technology. To achieve these goals, the rule added Federal Motor Vehicle Safety A. Maximum Test Speed for Unbelted a wide variety of new requirements, test Standards; Occupant Crash Protection Barrier Test B. Minimum Test Speed for Unbelted procedures, and injury criteria, based on AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Barrier Test the use of an assortment of new Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. C. Additional Tests dummies. Among other things, it 1. The Consumer Groups’ Requests ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions replaced the current sled test with a 2. Agency Response to Consumer Groups’ rigid barrier crash test for assessing the for reconsideration. Requests D. Positioning Procedure for the 5th protection of unbelted occupants. SUMMARY: This document responds to Percentile Adult Female Test Dummy The issuance of the rule completed petitions for reconsideration of the new, (Barrier Test) the implementation of our 1996 advanced air bag final rule; interim final V. Issues Related to Minimizing the Risk of comprehensive plan for reducing air bag rule that we published in May 2000. Injuries and Deaths Caused By Air Bags risks. It was also required by the This document grants portions of the A. Automatic Suppression Requirements Transportation Equity Act for the 21st petitions and denies other portions of 1. Child Restraints Century (TEA 21), which was enacted in the petitions. 2. Dummy Positioning 1998. That Act required us to issue a The May 2000 final rule amended our 3. Use of Humans for Testing Automatic Suppression Systems rule amending Standard No. 208: occupant crash protection standard to B. Low-Risk Deployment Options to improve occupant protection for occupants require that future air bags be designed 1. 300 ms Test Duration of different sizes, belted and unbelted, under so that, compared to current air bags, 2. Seat Positioning Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. they create less risk of serious air bag- 3. Tests to Determine Which Stage of 208, while minimizing the risk to infants, induced injuries, particularly for small Deployment Will be Used in the Low- children, and other occupants from injuries women and young children; and Risk Deployment Tests and deaths caused by air bags, by means that provide improved frontal crash 4. Test Procedures for the Passenger-Side include advanced air bags. protection for all occupants, by means Air Bag (Emphasis added.) a. Chest-on-Instrument Panel Test that include advanced air bag Procedure The rule will improve protection and technology. The issuance of that rule b. Head-on-Instrument Panel Test minimize risk by requiring new tests completed the implementation of our Procedure and injury criteria and specifying the 1996 comprehensive plan for reducing c. Definition of Points, Planes and use of an entire family of test dummies: air bag risks. It was also required by the Materials the existing dummy representing 50th Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 5. Driver Side Air Bags percentile adult males, and new Century, which was enacted in 1998. VI. Issues Related to Injury Criteria dummies representing 5th percentile A. Head Injury Criteria (HIC) DATES: Effective Date: The amendments B. Chest Injury Measurements adult females, 6-year-old children, 3- made in this rule are effective January C. Neck Injury Criteria year-old children, and 1-year-old 17, 2002. VII. Issues Related to Labels, Telltales, and infants. With the addition of those Petitions: Petitions for reconsideration Owner’s Manual Information dummies, Standard No. 208 will more must be received by February 1, 2002. A. Warning Labels fully reflect the range in sizes of vehicle ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration B. Telltales occupants. should refer to the docket and notice C. Owner’s Manual Information The rule will be phased in during two number of this document and be VIII. Issues Related to Phase-in Requirements stages. The first stage phase-in will for Small Volume Manufacturers submitted to: Administrator, National require vehicles to be certified as IX. Other Issues 1 Highway Traffic Safety Administration, A. Dummy Containment passing the unbelted test requirements 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, B. Partial Compliance for both the 5th percentile adult female DC 20590. C. Cross-Reference for Test Duration and 50th percentile adult male dummies FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For D. Combination of Standard No. 208 in a 32–40 km/h (20–25 mph) rigid non-legal issues, you may contact Dr. Oblique Barrier Test and Standard No. barrier crash, and belted test 2 Roger A. Saul, Director, Office of 301 Oblique Barrier Test requirements for the same two E. Effective Date for New Data Filtering dummies in a rigid barrier crash with a Crashworthiness Standards, NPS–10. Technique Telephone: (202) 366–1740. Fax: (202) maximum test speed of 48 km/h (30 F. Use of Human Child to Detect the mph). In addition, the first stage will 493–2739. E-mail: Presence of an Infant [email protected]. X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices require vehicles to include technologies For legal issues, you may contact that will minimize the risk of air bag- Edward Glancy or Rebecca MacPherson, I. Background: The Advanced Air Bag induced injuries for young children and Office of Chief Counsel, NCC–20. Final Rule small adults. Telephone: (202) 366–2992. Fax: (202) On May 12, 2000, we published in the 366–3820. Federal Register (65 FR 30680) a final 1 ‘‘Unbelted test requirements’’ are requirements You may send mail to these officials rule; interim final rule to require that specify the use of unbelted dummies in testing vehicles. at the National Highway Traffic Safety advanced air bags. (Docket No. NHTSA 2 ‘‘Belted test requirements’’ are requirements that Administration, 400 Seventh St., SW., 00–7013; Notice 1.) The rule amended specify the use of belted dummies in testing Washington, DC, 20590. Standard No. 208, Occupant Crash vehicles.
VerDate 11
The second stage phase-in will crash test with both unbelted 5th 40 km/h (25 mph) offset deformable require vehicles to be certified as percentile adult female dummies and barrier test using belted 5th percentile passing the belted test requirements for unbelted 50th percentile adult male adult female dummies. A late air bag the 50th percentile adult male dummy dummies. The unbelted rigid barrier test deployment would allow enough time up to 56 km/h (35 mph). This replicates what happens to motor for even a belted occupant to move requirement will provide improved vehicles and their occupants in real forward into the steering wheel or protection for belted occupants. world crashes better than the current instrument panel during a crash before sled test does. The maximum test speed the air bag deploys. Thus, the occupant First Stage Phase-in—Risk Minimization for unbelted dummy testing will be 40 would be in contact with or very close Provisions km/h (25 mph). to the air bag module when the air bag During the first stage phase-in, from Our decision to set the maximum test deploys, creating an increased risk of September 1, 2003 to August 31, 2006, speed for unbelted dummy testing at 40 severe or fatal injury. In addition, the increasing percentages of motor vehicles km/h (25 mph) was issued as an interim 5th percentile female dummy is added will be required to meet requirements final rule. We concluded that was the to the 48 km/h (30 mph) belted rigid for minimizing air bag risks, primarily appropriate test speed for at least the barrier test that currently uses only the by either automatically turning off the TEA 21 implementation period (MY 50th percentile adult male dummy. air bag when young children are present 2004–2007). We explained that that or deploying the air bag in a manner speed will provide vehicle Second Stage Phase-in—Protection more benignly so that it is much less manufacturers with the flexibility they Improvement Provision likely to cause serious or fatal injury to need during that period to meet the During the second stage phase-in, out-of-position occupants.3 If they so technological challenges involved in from September 1, 2007 to August 31, wish, manufacturers may choose to use simultaneously improving protection 2010, the maximum test speed for the a combination of those approaches. and minimizing risk. To achieve those belted rigid barrier test will increase Manufacturers that decide to turn off twin goals, the manufacturers will have from 48 km/h (30 mph) to 56 km/h (35 the passenger air bag will use weight to comply with the wide variety of new mph) in tests with the 50th percentile sensors and/or other means of detecting requirements using an array of new adult male dummy only. As in the case the presence of young children. To test dummies during this near-term time of the first-stage requirements, this the ability of those means to detect the frame. second-stage requirement will be presence of children, the rule specifies However, we did not draw any final phased in for increasing percentages of that child dummies be placed in child conclusion about the appropriateness of motor vehicles. We explained that we seats that are, in turn, placed on the that test speed in the longer run. We did not include the 5th percentile adult passenger seat in both proper and (to explained that, at this time, we cannot female dummy in this requirement at simulate misuse) improper ways. It also assess whether the uncertainty about the this time because we have sparse specifies tests that are conducted with manufacturers’ ability to improve information on the practicability of such unrestrained child dummies sitting, protection further and minimize risk a requirement. We stated that we would kneeling, standing, or lying on the simultaneously will persist beyond the initiate testing to examine this issue and passenger seat. TEA 21 implementation period. We anticipated proposing increasing the test The ability of air bags to deploy in a stated that, in addition, while we speed for belted tests using the 5th low-risk manner will be tested using believed that it was unlikely that the percentile adult female dummy to 56 child dummies on the passenger side selection of a 40 km/h (25 mph) km/h (35 mph), beginning at the same and the small adult female dummy on maximum test speed (instead of a 48 time that the belted test must be met at the driver side. For manufacturers that km/h (30 mph) maximum test speed) that speed using the 50th percentile decide to design their passenger air bags would lead to a reduction in high speed adult male. That testing has already to deploy in a low risk manner, the rule protection during that period and the begun. specifies that unbelted child dummies years beyond, we could not rule out that be placed against the instrument panel possibility. We noted that if Preceding Rulemaking Proposals in two different positions. The air bag is manufacturers were to engage in The rule was preceded by a notice of then deployed. This placement was significant depowering, it could result proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which specified because pre-crash braking can in lesser crash performance for teenage we published in the Federal Register cause unrestrained children to move and adult occupants. (63 FR 49958) (Docket No. NHTSA–98– forward into or near the instrument We stated that, to help resolve these 4405) on September 18, 1998, and a panel before the air bag deploys. The issues and concerns, we were planning supplemental notice of proposed ability of driver air bags to deploy in a a multi-year effort to obtain additional rulemaking (SNPRM), which we low risk manner will be tested by data. We stated that, based on the published in the Federal Register (64 placing the 5th percentile adult female results of those information gathering FR 60556) (Docket No. NHTSA–99– dummy against the steering wheel in and analysis efforts, we would make a 6407) on November 5, 1999. final decision regarding the maximum two different positions and then II. Petitions for Reconsideration deploying the air bag. test speed for unbelted dummy testing in the long run, after providing Eight petitions for reconsideration First Stage Phase-in—Protection opportunity for informed public were submitted to the agency (see Improvement Provisions comment. Docket No. 7013). Four of the petitions In addition, the vehicle manufacturers The final rule made still other were from manufacturers of vehicles or will be required to meet a rigid barrier additions to Standard No. 208. To air bags. Petitions were also filed by ensure that vehicle manufacturers three industry associations representing 3 The rule also establishes very general upgrade their crash sensing and vehicle manufacturers, and by a performance requirements for dynamic automatic software systems as necessary to prevent coalition of four consumer groups. In suppression systems (DASS) and a special expedited petitioning and rulemaking process for late air bag deployments in crashes with addition, Isuzu and TRW submitted considering procedures for testing advanced air bag soft pulses, they will be required to requests for clarification before the systems incorporating a DASS. design their vehicles to meet an up-to- period of time for filing petitions had
VerDate 11
run. Honda, Autoliv, and Ferrari filed claimed that meeting the requirements requirement for the 6-year-old child comments that would be considered of the unbelted barrier tests at speeds dummy, the barrier test would be petitions for reconsideration had they below 40 km/h (25 mph) may prevent conducted using that dummy. been timely filed. These comments are them from certifying compliance on the While the petitions regarding the low addressed in today’s document. passenger side using the low risk risk deployment tests for the passenger The coalition of consumer groups deployment option. They also claimed air bag addressed both the dummy head- which filed a petition included the they would have difficulty meeting the on-instrument panel position and Center for Auto Safety, the Consumer low risk deployment requirements on dummy chest-on-instrument panel test Federation of America, Parents for Safer the driver side. Several petitioners also position, the greatest criticism was Air Bags, and Public Citizen. (We will expressed concern over the seating leveled against the chest-on-instrument refer to this coalition of consumer position for the 5th percentile adult panel position procedure. While other groups as the ‘‘Consumer Groups.’’) The female test dummy in the barrier tests. petitioners expressed general concerns Consumer Groups requested several Several requests were made about the test procedure in their changes to the final rule. First, they concerning the automatic suppression petitions, the most comprehensive requested we amend the unbelted rigid option, most of which concerned the analysis was provided by TRW. TRW barrier test requirements in the final level of seat belt cinch down force for noted that when both the 3-year-old and rule to require a higher test speed for the belted test procedures and the the 6-year-old test dummies were passenger cars (48 km/h (30 mph)) than selection of child restraints. Toyota, the initially positioned as specified and for light trucks, vans and SUVs (40 km/ Alliance, DaimlerChrysler and Takata then moved forward, dummy contact h (25 mph)). Second, they requested that all stated that they believed the 134 N with the windshield or instrument we require that the 40 km/h (25 mph) (30 pounds) cinch-down force specified panel could result in the dummy being offset deformable barrier test be in the final rule was unreasonable. positioned at a considerable distance conducted with unbelted instead of Petitioners urged NHTSA to adopt a from the air bag unless the dummy were belted dummies and that the vehicle cinch down force of 67N (15 pounds), moved after contact was made. impact the barrier on both the driver which is currently specified in Standard Several petitioners, including TRW, and passenger sides. Third, they asked No. 213. DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota, sought that we require manufacturers to meet a Toyota also raised several issues in its clarification of what was meant by the 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test petition related to the use of current ‘‘geometric center of the right air bag with the 5th percentile adult female anthropomorphic test dummies and tear seam,’’ the point used to align the dummy as well as the 50th percentile humans in automatic suppression tests. dummies in the static low risk adult male dummy. Fourth, they asked It urged the agency to work with deployment tests of passenger air bags. that we require vehicles to satisfy all industry in developing better test They noted that many passenger rigid barrier test requirements in both dummies because of the recognition systems do not have a true tear seam. the perpendicular and oblique modes. problems many automatic suppression Instead, they may have a cover that The Coalition of Small Volume systems have with the current test opens as part of the instrument panel, Automobile Manufacturers (COSVAM) dummies. Mitsubishi echoed this or the instrument panel may be a solid petitioned us to expand the scope of a request. structure with no visible tear seam. In special provision we included in the We received several requests both of these instances, the ‘‘geometric final rule to accommodate the needs of regarding the test procedures for both center of the right air bag tear seam’’ is small volume manufacturers (SVMs). the driver and passenger low-risk difficult to determine and could vary The provision at issue permits deployment tests, as well as the 300 ms depending on who is conducting the manufacturers that produce fewer than test duration specified in the final rule test. 5,000 vehicles per year worldwide to for those tests. Additionally, several Petitions concerning the positioning wait until the end of the phase-in to issues regarding the low-risk procedure for the low risk deployment meet the new requirements. COSVAM deployment test procedures were raised test on the driver side focused on the petitioned us to apply this provision to at a December 2000 technical workshop procedure for the dummy chin-on- manufacturers that produce up to that the agency conducted to explore steering wheel rim test. Toyota stated in 10,000 vehicles per year. Alternatively, issues related to test procedures. Several its petition that the final rule did not it petitioned that the 5,000 vehicle cap petitioners, including Toyota, the adequately ensure that the dummy’s be limited to vehicles sold in the United Alliance, TRW, and DaimlerChrysler chin would not catch on the rim of the States per year or that the 5,000 vehicle argued against the extension of the 300 steering wheel, leading to artificially cap be averaged over the phase-in ms test data acquisition requirement for high neck extension bending moments. period. Under the averaged approach, if measuring injury criteria in the static Honda raised similar concerns. Toyota a manufacturer produced more than low risk deployment tests. The also stated that using the seat to move 5,000 vehicles in a single year, it could petitioners argued that data should only the dummy forward results in pre- still take advantage of the exclusion as be counted for the period prior to recoil loading the dummy. Mitsubishi and long as its average of production during of the head, neck and torso away from TRW queried whether forward head the phase-in was not more than 5,000 the air bag into the seat back, head movement was to cease if the dummy vehicles per year. restraint, B-pillar or other interior chest or torso impacted the steering The petitions from manufacturers and components. DaimlerChrysler wheel before the head contacted the their associations requested numerous petitioned the agency to change the test windshield. changes in other aspects of the final procedure for determining which stage The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and rule. or stages of the air bag to fire in the low Toyota petitioned for changes in the DaimlerChrysler and Toyota risk deployment tests. It argued in favor final rule’s new injury criteria. The requested that the unbelted rigid barrier of allowing the use of the dummies for Alliance and DaimlerChrysler test be conducted at only 40 km/h (25 which the low-risk deployment petitioned the agency to set the Head mph), with the possibility of a small technology is designed to be used in the Injury Criterion (HIC) maxima for the tolerance, instead of the specified range initial test. Thus, if a manufacturer 5th percentile adult female dummy and of 32 to 40 km/h (20 to 25 mph). They certifies to the low-risk deployment the 6-year-old child dummy at a
VerDate 11
maximum HIC of 779 and 723, procedures in their written submissions. IV. Improving the Protection of respectively. The Alliance, Toyota and The agency decided to hold a technical Occupants in Serious Crashes DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency workshop so that it could better A. Maximum Test Speed for Unbelted to adopt the Alliance’s scaled chest understand the specific concerns and to Barrier Test acceleration maximum of 73 g for the determine if the test procedures needed 5th percentile adult female dummy. refinement. The workshop was held at In their petition for reconsideration, the Consumer Groups requested that we They expressed particular concern over NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Test amend the final rule to require the effect that the 60 g limit would have Center in East Liberty, Ohio on passenger cars to meet a 48 km/h (30 in the belted barrier test for the 50th December 6, 2000. Representatives of 18 percentile adult male dummy. In their mph) unbelted barrier test, while vehicle manufacturers and 13 seat, petitions for reconsideration, both applying the 40 km/h (25 mph) sensor, and dummy manufacturers Toyota and DaimlerChrysler reiterated maximum speed only to LTVs (light their concerns with the Hybrid III attended the workshop. Five different trucks, vans and SUVs). dummy neck design and with the vehicles were used as test vehicles. These petitioners stated that, in their adoption of Neck Injury Criterion (Nij) Some of the five had been provided by view, the primary reason why the an injury criterion. Toyota asked that the manufacturer because it was agency lowered the standard’s unbelted the introduction of Nij be delayed until experiencing particular problems with test speed to 40 km/h (25 mph) for all certain bending moment issues are the existing test procedures in these vehicles, including passenger cars, was resolved. DaimlerChrysler asked the vehicles. The workshop focused on the because of the greater difficulties that agency to measure only axial force cinch-down procedure for the child SUVs and light trucks would have in rather than using Nij due to problems it seats, and the positioning procedures for complying with a 48 km/h (30 mph) believes the current Hybrid III neck has the low-risk deployment tests. There unbelted test, due to their stiffer frames. in measuring bending moments. was some discussion about the In support of this assertion, the We also received petitions for positioning procedure for the 5th Consumer Groups cited a statement by reconsideration for and comments on percentile adult female test dummy for the agency in the final rule preamble both the changed label and on the issue the rigid barrier tests. After we had that ‘‘a 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum test speed gives vehicle manufacturers more of whether to allow additional finished trying out the test procedures information other than that required by flexibility to address the greater on the various test vehicles, we allowed compliance problems associated with the warning label. Toyota urged us to parties to make presentations. TRW, keep the existing warning label, except vehicles, e.g., SUVs, with particularly DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, and others for the addition of the statement ‘‘even stiff pulses.’’ provided slide presentations with advanced air bags,’’ arguing that The Consumer Groups argued further the advanced air bag technology is not highlighting their specific concerns. that passenger cars can meet the new yet developed enough to justify a Copies of these presentations have been injury criteria in a 48 km/h (30 mph) weaker label. DaimlerChrysler, Toyota, placed in the docket (NHTSA–00–7013– unbelted test. In support of this GM, the Alliance and Ford have all 51). argument, they alleged that test results show some passenger cars already meet requested that NHTSA limit any III. Summary of Response to Petitions information beyond that in the required the unbelted 48 km/h (30 mph) test label to the owner’s manual. Parents for We are making several changes to the requirements for both 50th percentile Safer Air Bags asked for clarification of final rule in response to the petitions. male and 5th percentile female the agency’s position regarding the These changes include a number of dummies. The Consumer Groups stated that extent of information to be provided on refinements to the positioning since, in their view, manufacturers the labels. procedures for the low risk deployment The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and already build some cars that meet the 48 tests and, to a lesser degree, for the km/h (30 mph) unbelted test, NHTSA Mitsubishi petitioned the agency to automatic suppression tests. We are also revise the current requirement that the should have required cars to meet the 48 changing the test duration for the low telltale indicating the passenger air bag km/h (30 mph) unbelted test, while risk deployment tests. Also, the test has been suppressed be visible to allowing LTVs to meet a 40 km/h (25 occupants of all ages, and urged us used for determining the stage(s) of the mph) test. They argued that this would instead to adopt the requirements of air bag to be used for the passenger side provide manufacturers with additional Standard No. 101, Controls and low risk tests is modified. We are also time and necessary design flexibility to Displays. DaimlerChrysler also modifying the definition of small develop engineering solutions to meet requested the regulatory text be clarified volume manufacturer for the purpose of 48 km/h (30 mph) test for LTVs at some to assure that the telltale would be the rule’s phase-in schedule. We have future time. They also argued that a visible to all occupants seated in a also added an option to use human separate phase-in would take account of forward-facing position, and that it not children instead of the newborn or 12- the need to improve occupant be obstructed by a rear-facing child month-old dummies to test a vehicle’s protection in light of the increased restraint. The Alliance requested that occupant recognition system. number of LTVs. The Consumer Groups stated that, with LTVs accounting for they be allowed to use the abbreviation We have decided against making any over half of new vehicle sales, the need ‘‘pass’’ in lieu of ‘‘passenger’’ in the changes to the rigid and offset for a high level of occupant protection message text. DaimlerChrysler requested deformable barrier tests other than the that manufacturers be allowed to use a for passenger car occupants is especially seating procedure for the 5th percentile acute since car occupants are four times universal symbol representing the status adult female test dummy. Nor are we of the air bag rather than a specified more likely to be killed in collisions making any changes to the required text. with LTVs than their LTV counterparts. injury criteria. We are addressing The petitioners noted that the agency Technical Workshop petitions for reconsideration of the has in the past adopted different phase- Petitioners raised a large number of offset deformable barrier design in a ins for different types of vehicles, with concerns about the various test separate rulemaking. passenger cars being required to meet
VerDate 11
more stringent safety standards sooner 30680, at 30687–30690. These reasons combination of both of these than light trucks. (presented in a condensed fashion) were technologies to meet the risk The Consumer Groups argued that the as follows: minimization requirements. Even now, decision to apply the 40 km/h (25 mph) 1. It is very important that advanced more than one year later the issuance of test speed to passenger cars as well as air bags be properly designed from the the May 2000 final rule, NHTSA cannot LTVs has serious consequences because very beginning. Because of the potential forecast how long it will take to in frontal crashes between light trucks/ for death and injury, we want to be complete the process of simultaneously SUVs and cars, the lighter car cautious in how far and how fast vehicle developing and incorporating all of experiences a higher crash severity than manufacturers are required to advance these technologies into all vehicles the heavier truck. The Consumer Groups the state of advanced air bag lines. NHTSA decided that we would argued that cars that need more technologies in their vehicles. We are increase the risks of advanced air bags protection received less protection particularly concerned about the not being able to meet all of the new under the final rule. The petitioners also difficulties of trying to meet the requirements if we adopted the more argued that since a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted rigid barrier test at 48 km/h (30 difficult 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test speed represents median speed of mph) with both adult dummies while test. Those were not, and are not, risks all fatal frontal crashes, NHTSA is simultaneously trying to reduce the that the agency is willing to take with sacrificing passenger car occupants by risks of air bag-induced injuries and the available information. not requiring 48 km/h (30 mph) deaths. Since a significant percentage of Differences in crash pulse are but one protection at least for passenger cars. current vehicles can already satisfy the of the many technological challenges After carefully considering the new unbelted barrier crash test at 40 that must be overcome to provide arguments that the Consumer Groups km/h (25 mph) with both the 5th improved protection for all occupants as made in support of their request that we percentile adult female dummy and the well as to reduce the risks of air bag- adopt a 48 km/h (30 mph) maximum 50th percentile adult male dummy, we induced injuries. The need to develop test speed for passenger cars during the conclude that setting the maximum and apply technology that works TEA 21 phase-in, we have decided to speed at that level will help vehicle reliably is a challenge for both passenger deny that request. The reasons for our manufacturers to focus their resources cars and light trucks. denial are discussed below. and compliance efforts during the first 2. There are unresolved issues that The Consumer Groups’ argued that stage on meeting the risk reduction make it difficult for vehicles to provide the agency’s primary justification for requirements. While advanced air bag protection for both small females and adopting a 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum technologies will facilitate mid-sized males in a 48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted test speed for all light vehicles, simultaneously achieving the goals of unbelted test without compromising including passenger cars was the greater improving protection and minimizing efforts to minimize the risks of serious difficulties that vehicles with risk, we cannot forecast the pace of air bag-induced injuries. A good particularly stiff crash pulses, e.g., development of those technologies. example is the issue of the best strategy SUVs, would have in meeting a 48 km/ We noted that while the for using the two inflation levels of a h (30 mph) unbelted test. They manufacturers’ resources for dealing dual-stage air bag to meet that test. The contrasted those difficulties with the with air bags, as well as all the other choice among competing strategies is fact that they believe some passenger engineering issues associated with complicated by the existence of ‘‘gray’’ cars already meet the unbelted 48 km/ future motor vehicles, are extensive, or transition zones, i.e., ranges of h (30 mph) barrier test for both the 50th there are limits to how much can be conditions in which the air bag changes percentile adult male dummy and the done at any one time. We explained that from one level of performance to 5th percentile adult female dummy. we needed to consider the variety and another. They concluded that the agency should, complexity of changes in air bag testing To date, the vehicle manufacturers therefore, have adopted a 48 km/h (30 and technology that will be required by have been required to certify mph) maximum speed for passenger the rule. We noted that the array of new compliance of their air bags based on cars. requirements that the manufacturers only a single size of dummy at only a We believe that the petitioners may will have to meet in the first stage is single seat adjustment position. Tuning have misunderstood the agency’s challenging. The May 2000 final rule an air bag to perform in that single reasoning. Contrary to the petitioners’ specified the use of a new test dummy combination of test conditions is a assertion, the greater challenges posed (the 5th percentile adult female) in high relatively simple task. No regulatory by vehicles with stiffer crash pulses, speed tests, added a new test (offset requirements preclude manufacturers including typical SUVs, was only one of belted), adds new neck injury criteria, from optimizing performance for that many considerations, and not the and made existing injury criteria more combination of test conditions while paramount one, that led the agency to stringent (chest deflection). The rule placing secondary importance on other conclude that 40 km/h (25 mph) should also added an entire new series of risk sizes of occupants in other seat be chosen as the maximum speed for the minimization tests, which require adjustment positions. unbelted test in the near term. In the manufacturers to install air bag In the May 2000 final rule, NHTSA for summary of our May 2000 final rule, suppression systems or low-risk the first time required manufacturers to NHTSA said that the maximum test deployment systems, or both. balance the performance of their air bag speed for the unbelted test ‘‘reflect the Of particular concern here was that systems for different sized occupants. In uncertainty of simultaneously achieving air bags must be tuned to inflate quickly addition to protecting mid-size male the twin goals of TEA 21,’’ to provide enough to protect the unbelted mid- dummies with the seat in the mid-track improved frontal crash protection for all sized male dummy without posing risks position, air bags will be required to occupants and to minimize the risks of to the unbelted small female dummy protect small size female dummies with serious air bag-induced injuries. that will be positioned much closer to the seat all the way forward. This is a NHTSA set forth six reasons for why the air bag. At the same time, far more challenging task for air bag it was in the best overall interest of manufacturers are required to develop system designers. We expect that the safety to choose 40 km/h (25 mph) as and tune suppression technologies, low- new, more demanding requirements the unbelted test speed. See 65 FR risk deployment technologies, or a will encourage the use of dual-stage
VerDate 11
inflator technology. Although the other test conditions. Again, while the formidable for all light vehicles, challenge of this task may be need for design flexibility may be regardless of crash pulse. compounded somewhat by a relatively compounded somewhat by a relatively 5. It is unlikely that vehicle stiff crash pulse, the task is formidable stiff crash pulse, that need is substantial manufacturers will significantly for all vehicles, regardless of crash for all vehicles, regardless of crash depower their air bags and minimally pulse. pulse. comply with the 40 km/h (25 mph) test. 3. The vehicle manufacturers need 4. A 40 km/h (25 mph) maximum test Thus, NHTSA believes that it is not design flexibility to address issues speed gives vehicle manufacturers more risking a substantial loss of benefits by regarding performance in real world flexibility to address the greater establishing an unbelted barrier test of crash conditions not directly replicated compliance problems associated with 40 km/h (25 mph). by Standard No. 208’s tests. One of the vehicles, e.g., SUVs, with particularly We explained our view that the air greatest limitations of early generation stiff crash pulses. Since unbelted bags most likely to be produced under air bags is that they typically deploy in occupants moving forward in frontal a 40 km/h (25 mph) standard would the same manner regardless of such crashes of these vehicles will have to be offer at least as much overall high speed factors as crash severity or occupant engaged more quickly than in vehicles protection as the current redesigned air size, weight or position. Successful with softer crash pulses, the task of bags, i.e., those certified to the sled test implementation of air bags designed to designing air bag systems in stiff pulse option adopted in 1997. We noted that vary their performance in response to vehicles is significantly more while manufacturers might make some sensed differences in crash severity or challenging. adjustments in providing high speed protection for different size occupants, other conditions presents a challenge to This reason is based on the greater we believed it was unlikely that they the manufacturers in that these air bags compliance difficulties for vehicles with would reduce the overall level of have ‘‘gray’’ or transition zones, i.e., relatively stiff crash pulses. As a protection, much less switch to some ranges of conditions in which the air generality, SUVs and other vehicles kind of new, hypothetical air bag design bag changes from one level of with frame rail construction have stiff that might minimally pass the 40 km/h performance to another. We believe it is crash pulses, while cars and other appropriate for the manufacturers (25 mph) test, but provide little or no vehicles with uni-body construction initially to introduce relatively simple protection to unbelted occupants in have softer crash pulses. In a crash, the advanced systems. While we believe higher severity crashes. occupants travel forward more quickly that more complex systems offer We cited several reasons for this toward the steering wheel and promise of even greater benefits, there belief. We noted that most vehicle dashboard in a vehicle with a stiff crash are significant uncertainties regarding manufacturers did not respond to the pulse than they would in a vehicle with the feasibility and thus availability of flexibility provided by the sled test by a softer crash pulse. Accordingly, air such systems. providing air bags that only minimally bags typically need to come out sooner Standard No. 208 currently tests for a complied with the sled test. They did and/or quicker in a vehicle with a full frontal crash. While such a crash not depower their air bags as much as similarly stiff crash pulse than they occurs less frequently, compared to they could have. We also noted that the would in a vehicle with a softer pulse. offset crashes, in the real world, we vehicle manufacturers had specifically To the extent that air bags must come have chosen the full frontal crash mode committed to not reducing high speed out quicker in vehicles with stiff crash because it is very repeatable and protection of air bag systems through pulses makes it more difficult to provides a more demanding evaluation significant and widespread depowering. of restraint systems. However, NHTSA minimize air bag risks in those vehicles For these reasons, and the others expects vehicle and air bag because the methods for getting air bags discussed in the final rule preamble, we manufacturers will take into account out quicker, e.g., having a fast inflation continue to believe that it is unlikely other frontal crash modes, such as offset rise rate, tend to make air bags more that there will be any significant crashes and crashes into poles. To the aggressive to out-of-position occupants. reduction in safety benefits as a result extent that we make our full frontal It is for this reason that the of our adoption of the 40 km/h (25 mph) crash test more stringent, we limit the technological challenges faced by the maximum test speed as an interim final ability of the manufacturers to take vehicle manufacturers in rule. Put another way, we continue to account of these other crash modes. simultaneously improving protection believe that we are not risking a This is because the most stringent test and minimizing risk can be somewhat substantial loss of benefits by is the primary determinant of the design greater for vehicles with stiff crash establishing a maximum unbelted of air bag and vehicle performance. pulses than for other vehicles. barrier test speed of 40 km/h (25 mph). After the performance attributes of the However, the above generalization We observe that the Consumer Groups air bag system are optimized for the about the relative crash pulses of cars did not provide any data or analysis most stringent test (in this case, the and other light vehicles has important contradicting our arguments in this area. unbelted full frontal barrier crash), the limitations. Some newer, more ‘‘car- Finally, we note that this fifth reason manufacturers will typically run a check like’’ SUVs, i.e., cross-over or hybrid applies equally to all vehicles, on performance in other relevant test SUVs, such as the Ford Escape and the regardless of whether they have a stiff conditions to ensure acceptable Honda CRV, are not built with frame rail or soft crash pulse. performance in those conditions as well. construction and do not have 6. Replacing the 48 km/h (30 mph) However, the ability to adjust particularly stiff crash pulses. On the generic sled test with the 40 km/h (25 performance to improve performance in other hand, many small cars, despite mph) unbelted rigid barrier test requires these other test conditions is limited by their uni-body construction, have a significantly higher level of safety. the stringency of the most severe test. relatively stiff crash pulses, because the This reason applies equally to all Choosing 48 km/h (30 mph), instead of small space limits the energy absorption vehicles, regardless of whether they 40 km/h (25 mph), as the maximum test by the front of the vehicle. Further, the have a stiff or soft crash pulse. speed for the unbelted full frontal crash uncertainties associated with the task of From this review of our six reasons would allow the manufacturers less simultaneously improving protection, for selecting a maximum test speed of flexibility to enhance performance in while also minimizing risk, are 40 km/h (25 mph), it is apparent that the
VerDate 11
differences in crash pulses were not a gathered the additional information km/h (18 mph) lower limit revolved paramount consideration in our necessary to resolve the uncertainties. around their ability to meet both the low assessment of the challenges presented Until we have that information, risk deployment tests for whatever by the advanced air bag rule. Given the however, our judgment remains that the stages of the air bag would deploy in uncertainties associated with most appropriate maximum speed for speeds up to 29 km/h (18 mph) and the overcoming those challenges, and a the unbelted test is 40 km/h (25 mph). unbelted high speed tests at any speed between 29 km/h (18 mph) and 40 to 48 statutory requirement to issue a final B. Minimum Test Speed for Unbelted km/h (25 to 30 mph). These rule in early 2000, NHTSA chose an Barrier Test approach that assures improved air bag manufacturers argued that while protection for occupants of all sizes, Under the May 2000 final rule; individual manufacturer’s strategies will without compromising efforts to reduce interim final rule, vehicle manufacturers differ, the basic premise for dual-stage the risks of air bar-induced injuries to are required to meet the rigid barrier inflation systems is that the first stage vulnerable occupants. As we said in the crash test with unbelted 5th percentile can be tailored to reduce risk for preamble to the May 2000 final rule: adult female dummies and unbelted children while offering protection for 50th percentile adult male dummies at 5th percentile adult females while the Such an approach is one that involves the all speeds from 32 km/h through 40 km/ least uncertainty for the occupants who have second stage protects the 50th percentile been most at risk. In other words, as long as h (20 mph and through 25 mph). adult male occupant. According to the the manufacturers improve the already In their petitions for reconsideration, manufacturers, in many cases a first substantial overall level of air bag protection DaimlerChrysler and Toyota requested stage air bag that would not harm provided by current redesigned air bags, the that the unbelted rigid barrier test be children would not be sufficient to uncertainty involved in meeting the conducted only at 40 km/h (25 mph) (or satisfy the injury criteria performance challenge to improve high-speed protection at 40 km/h (25 mph) with a small limits for the 50th percentile adult male and minimize risk simultaneously is best tolerance) instead of over a range of test dummy in a test at 40 km/h (25 mph) resolved at this point in favor of minimizing speeds. They claimed that the need to and may be insufficient to certify risk. This is especially true in the early stages meet the unbelted rigid barrier test with compliance in a 29 km/h (18 mph) test. of the introduction of advanced air bag 50th percentile adult male dummies technologies. In order to assure compliance with both over the range of speeds between 32 km/ the unbelted crash test requirement and 65 FR 30680, at 30688 (Emphasis h and 40 km/h (20 mph and 25 mph) a low risk deployment option utilizing added). creates a conflict with meeting the low a dual-stage air bag system, a We selected that test speed on a risk requirements using 3-year-old and manufacturer arguably would either interim final basis in recognition of the 6-year-old child dummies on the have to drop the threshold for the possibility that those uncertainties may passenger side and using the 5th second stage air bag close to 29 km/h be resolved in the foreseeable future. To percentile adult female dummy on the (18 mph) to ensure compliance for the expedite the resolution of those driver side. 50th percentile adult male or provide a uncertainties, we committed to a multi- In addressing these petitions, we higher-energy first stage inflator. The year effort to obtain additional data to begin by noting that we addressed this commenters asserted that if NHTSA help resolve the issues and concerns issue in the final rule preamble, and were to impose the proposed speed relating to the unbelted test speed in the made changes from the SNPRM to the range for the unbelted tests, we would barrier crash test. See 65 FR 30692. To final rule in light of this concern. create a situation that would make carry out that commitment, we In the SNPRM, we proposed that compliance with a low risk deployment published for public comment our plan manufacturers would need to meet the option impossible, since it would not be for monitoring the performance of unbelted rigid barrier test at any speed possible to assure that only the first advanced air bags and gathering the between 29 km/h (18 mph) to the stage air bag deploys at 29 km/h (18 information needed to make a final maximum speed (as discussed earlier, mph) for the out-of-position test. decision on the appropriate test speed we were considering a range between 40 For the final rule, we decided to raise for the unbelted test in the long run. See to 48 km/h (25 to 30 mph) for the the minimum test speed for the 66 FR 33657; June 25, 2001 (Docket No. maximum speed). This range unbelted test from 29 km/h (18 mph) to NHTSA 2001–8953). represented a change from the belted 32 km/h (20 mph) while decreasing the In the final analysis, the consumer barrier test and previous unbelted maximum threshold for the various out- groups provided no new data or barrier tests, which required injury of-position tests from 29 km/h (18 mph) analyses regarding our decision to select criteria to be met at any speed up to 48 to 26 km/h (16 mph). We stated that we a maximum test speed of 40 km/h (25 km/h (30 mph). believed that this difference in speed mph). Further, they isolated and In commenting on the SNPRM, GM between the two tests would be focused on a limited portion of all the and Ford supported the proposed lower sufficient to resolve manufacturers’ considerations leading to that decision test parameter 29 km/h (18 mph). AAM, concerns in this area. We noted that the in arguing that that limited portion DaimlerChrysler and Toyota supported requirement we adopted built in a 6 km/ should overwhelm the big picture. Their a higher minimum test speed. VW and h (4 mph) ‘‘grey zone’’ that would allow petition simply highlights their Honda supported a lower minimum test manufacturers to assure the deployment judgment that they would have speed. Delphi urged the agency to return of both inflator stages, if needed, in all mandated a higher speed for the to its traditional ‘‘any speed between high speed tests, while preserving their unbelted test, given the information that zero and’’ the maximum test speed, ability to deploy only the first stage (or was available to us when we made our arguing that the minimum test speed allow for deployment of a combination decision. We respect their judgment, but will result in an unacceptable safety of benign stages) of the air bag in the reached different conclusions after trade-off for individuals who could be low risk deployment tests. considering all of the risks and aided by a deploying air bag in lower In the final rule preamble, we stated uncertainties in this area. It may be that speed crashes. that we were rejecting DaimlerChrysler’s we will ultimately propose coming to In the final rule preamble, we and Toyota’s request that we test the same conclusion that the Consumer explained that the concerns of the unbelted dummies only at 40 km/h (25 Groups are advocating—after we have vehicle manufacturers opposed to the 29 mph) because we continued to believe
VerDate 11
a range of speeds is necessary to (Emphasis added.) than driver air bags to provide adequately protect drivers and adult There is obviously a tension between protection. Larger air bags typically passengers. improving occupant protection for create greater risk to out-of-position In petitioning for reconsideration, occupants of different sizes, belted and occupants than smaller air bags. Second, DaimlerChrysler again requested testing unbelted, while also minimizing the risk young children are more susceptible to only at 40 km/h (25 mph). That to infants, children, and other occupants risk than adults. manufacturer argued that the from injuries and deaths caused by air To address the risks posed by requirement for protecting an unbelted bags. This tension exists because the passenger air bags, the rule requires 50th percentile adult male occupant deployment process of the air bag that vehicles to either (1) have a passenger during a rigid barrier test at speeds as is needed to provide protection can also air bag that deploys in a low-risk manner to out-of-position occupants, (2) low as 32 km/h (20 mph) and the create risks for persons who are to have a feature that suppresses the air requirement for static out-of-position extremely close to the air bag before that bag when a young child is present in a tests to be conducted with whichever air deployment. It was because of this variety of positions, or (3) to have a bag stage is deployed during a 26 km/ tension that Congress included the feature that suppresses the air bag when h (16 mph) rigid barrier test are in reference to ‘‘advanced air bags’’; it a passenger is out-of-position (including conflict and inconsistent with the recognized the need for vehicle in dynamic events). The risk reality of crash sensing and air bag manufacturers to incorporate advanced minimization requirements must be met inflator technology. technologies in their air bags in order Toyota similarly argued that the separately for 1-year-old, 3-year-old and for these two goals to be met agency’s decision to reduce the test 6-year-old children, and manufacturers simultaneously. speed range from 29–40 km/h (18–25 may choose different options for these However, while we recognize that mph) to 32–40 km/h (20–25 mph), three classes of occupants. We there is a tension between these goals, although directionally correct, does not developed the risk minimization there is no conflict between requiring adequately address the concerns it requirements for passenger air bags in vehicles to meet the rigid barrier crash outlined in its comment on the SNPRM. light of these classes of occupants test with unbelted 5th percentile adult That company argued that conflicts because, on the passenger side, the vast female dummies and unbelted 50th exist between offering sufficient majority of deaths and serious injuries percentile adult male dummies at all compliance margin for the 50th from air bags have been to young speeds between 32 km/h and 40 km/h percentile male dummy in the upper children. (20 mph and 25 mph) while also speed ranges and the desire to minimize We believe that all manufacturers are meeting risk minimization risk to out-of-position children and focusing on suppressing the air bag for requirements. We will discuss this issue small adults. Toyota stated that it 1-year-old children. Thus, the separately for the driver and passenger believes that given the limitations of requirements for those children are not sides. current seat suppression technology, relevant to the issues raised by To address the risks posed by driver 4 regardless of its performance in DaimlerChrysler and Toyota. air bags, the rule requires vehicles to Manufacturers are generally focusing certification tests under controlled either (1) have a driver air bag that conditions, automakers must be allowed on the first two options for 3-year-old deploys in a low-risk manner to out-of- children and 6-year-old children; i.e., the design flexibility to offer seemingly position occupants or (2) to have a redundant technologies to protect out- the low risk deployment requirements feature that suppresses the air bag when and/or suppressing the air bag in the of-position children in the real world. a driver is out-of-position (including in On reconsideration, after carefully presence of young children. dynamic events). We believe that all considering DaimlerChrysler’s and The ability of an air bag to deploy in manufacturers are focusing on the first Toyota’s requests that we specify testing a low risk manner is tested in static out- of these two options. The ability of air of unbelted dummies only at 40 km/h of-position tests, using unbelted 3-year- bags to deploy in a low-risk manner is (25 mph) instead of a range between 32– old and 6-year-old child dummies tested in static, out-of-position tests, 40 km/h (20–25 mph), we have decided placed against the instrument panel in using unbelted 5th percentile adult to deny those requests. As discussed two positions, and deploying the air bag female dummies placed against the below, we again conclude that the 32– with any stages that may deploy during steering wheel, and deploying the air 40 km/h (20–25 mph) range of speeds a 26 km/h (16 mph) rigid barrier test. bag with any stage(s) that may deploy helps ensure adequate protection of Specified injury criteria performance during a 26 km/h (16 mph) rigid barrier drivers and adult passengers. Moreover, limits must be met to pass the low risk test. we believe that the change requested by test. We believe the arguments raised by Manufacturers that decide to suppress these petitioners is unnecessary, DaimlerChrysler and Toyota are the passenger air bag in the presence of particularly in light of another change primarily relevant to passenger side air young children will use weight sensors, we are making in response to the bags and not to driver air bags. The pattern recognition sensors and/or other petitions for reconsideration. In addressing the requests of information we have indicates that means of detecting their presence. To DaimlerChrysler and Toyota, it is available technology enables vehicle test the ability of those means to detect appropriate to begin by citing again the manufacturers to meet the low risk and the presence of children, the rule requirements of TEA 21, that the agency unbelted high speed protection 4 issue a final rule meeting two different, requirements for driver air bags. We note that the risk minimization requirements We recognize that passenger air bags using infant dummies differ in certain respects from equally important goals: those using 3-year-child dummies and 6-year-old pose a greater design challenge than child dummies. The third option cited above, for a To improve occupant protection for driver air bags with respect to occupants of different sizes, belted and feature that suppresses the air bag when a passenger simultaneously meeting both low risk is out-of-position, is not available for infant unbelted, under Federal Motor Vehicle Safety and unbelted high speed protection dummies because infants in rear facing child seats Standard No. 208, while minimizing the risk would always be extremely close to the air bag. to infants, children, and other occupants requirements. The challenge is greater Different requirements also apply with respect to from injuries and deaths caused by air bags, for two reasons. First, passenger air bags determining which stages of an air bag are deployed by means that include advanced air bags. typically need to be considerably larger in low risk deployment tests.
VerDate 11
specifies that 3-year-old and 6-year-old manufacturers to meet the low risk and one test from a belted test to an unbelted child dummies are placed in child seats unbelted high speed protection test. These requests of the Consumer that are, in turn, placed on the requirements for driver air bags, even Groups are addressed below. passenger seat. It also specifies tests that without using dual stage air bags. 1. The Consumer Groups’ Requests are conducted with unrestrained child As for passenger air bags, we note that dummies sitting, kneeling, standing, or the advanced air bag final rule does not Protection for unbelted occupants in lying on the passenger seat. At the require manufacturers to meet low risk crashes with soft pulses. The Consumer option of the manufacturer, the ability requirements for passenger air bags. Groups argued that the final rule does of a suppression system to detect the They can alternatively choose to meet not require protection for unbelted presence of a child may be the standard’s risk minimization occupants in crashes with soft pulses. demonstrated using human beings requirements for passenger air bags by They stated that although NHTSA instead of test dummies. suppressing the air bag in the presence recognizes that many air bag fatalities While manufacturers are required to of 3-year-old and 6-year-old children. A occur in low speed, soft pulse crashes, meet at least one of the options number of vehicle manufacturers appear where the air bag deploys late and specified by the risk minimization to be pursuing this option. strikes an out-of-position occupant who requirements, they are free to meet more Also, as discussed later in this has moved forward in the crash before than one of those options. For example, document, we are making another the air bag deploys, the agency failed to they can suppress the air bag in the change in the final rule that should require any test to protect against this in presence of young children and also resolve any concerns as to whether the the final rule. The Consumer Groups provide air bags that deploy in a low need to meet the standard’s high speed argued that the agency instead adopted risk manner. protection requirements for unbelted only a belted offset deformable barrier We recognize that the combination of 50th percentile adult male dummies test and an automatic suppression test. suppression and low risk deployment prevents manufacturers from providing They argued that neither of these tests may best achieve the goal of minimizing low risk deployment for small children. requires protection for unbelted air bag risks. For example, low risk In particular, we have decided to use occupants in crashes with soft pulses. deployment air bags may provide 5th percentile adult female dummies, The Consumer Groups argued that benefits that would not be provided by instead of 50th percentile adult male conducting the offset test with belted systems that simply suppress the air bag dummies, in the 26 km/h (16 mph) rigid dummies ignores the fact that unbelted in the presence of young children. It barrier test that is used for determining occupants are at greater risk from air was in light of this recognition, as well the stage(s) of the air bag to be used for bags than belted occupants. They also as to avoid unnecessary design the passenger side low risk tests. argued that manufacturers might restrictions, that we were willing to Thus, if a vehicle manufacturer faces respond to the up-to-40 km/h (25 mph) make some adjustments between the a situation where deployment of both belted offset test by suppressing SNPRM and the final rule to facilitate stages of a dual stage air bag is necessary deployment, whereas specifying the use use of low risk systems. In particular, to meet the unbelted barrier test of unbelted dummies would more likely we were willing to raise the minimum requirements for 50th percentile adult require deployment and the use of test speed for the unbelted test from 29 male dummies in a 32 km/h (20 mph) multi-stage inflators. The Consumer km/h (18 mph) to 32 km/h (20 mph) crash test, and, because of grey zone Groups apparently believed while decreasing the test speed issues, it is possible that both stages (erroneously) that the offset test is threshold for determining the stages to may fire in a 26 km/h (16 mph) crash, conducted with a dummy only on the deploy in the low risk deployment tests the manufacturer can design its air bag driver’s side and argued that this omits from 29 km/h (18 mph) to 26 km/h (16 system, using occupant recognition requiring protection for passengers. mph). technology, so that only the first stage The Consumer Groups also expressed However, we believe that granting will fire in the presence of 5th concern that the agency dropped the DaimlerChrysler’s and Toyota’s request percentile adult female dummies in proposed dynamic out-of-position test to raise further the minimum test speed crash tests at these severity levels. Since requirements. They stated that the final for the unbelted test from 32 km/h (20 only the first stage of the air bag would rule contains only a series of static tests mph) to 40 km/h (25 mph) (the same fire when 5th percentile adult female that are far simpler to meet than a speed as the maximum test speed) dummies are used in a 26 km/h (16 dynamic test. They stated that weight- would have significant adverse safety mph) rigid barrier test, only the first based static sensors can be fooled into consequences. stage would be fired when conducting false readings. They argued that the Unbelted occupants are at significant the low risk tests using child dummies. agency compounded this problem by risk of serious injury and fatality in deleting ‘‘rough road’’ testing. crashes with a delta V between 32 km/ C. Additional Tests The Consumer Groups requested that h and 40 km/h (20 mph and 25 mph). In addition to their request we require that the up-to-40 km/h (25 Indeed, the agency’s Final Economic concerning the maximum test speed for mph) offset deformable barrier test be Assessment for the advanced air bag the unbelted barrier test, the Consumer conducted with unbelted rather than final rule estimated that air bags Groups requested that we make a belted dummies and on both the driver designed for an unbelted rigid barrier number of other changes to address and passenger sides. test with a maximum test speed of 40 what they consider to be shortcomings High speed crash protection for 5th km/h (25 mph) would save 472 lives in of the final rule. They argued that the percentile adult females. The Consumer crashes within the 32 to 40 km/h (20 to final rule fails to follow the Groups also argued that the final rule 25 mph) range. Of these 472 lives saved, Congressional mandate of providing does not ensure high speed crash 372 would be on the driver side and 98 advanced air bag protection for all protection for 5th percentile adult would be on the passenger side. occupants, male and female, large and females. They objected to the agency’s We also believe that the change small, belted and unbelted. The adopting a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted test requested by these petitioners is Consumer Groups requested that we using 50th percentile adult male unnecessary. As noted earlier, available amend the final rule to add a number of dummies while deferring the decision technology enables vehicle tests. They also asked that we change whether to propose using 5th percentile
VerDate 11
adult female dummies until additional test requirements. At the same time, we on identifying a sensible, effective array testing is completed. They argued that wanted to be sure that the advanced air of requirements for increasing the agency’s explanation that there is bag rule included sufficient tests to protection and minimizing risk. A sparse information on the practicability ensure that air bags are redesigned to considerable portion of the new rule is of such a requirement is inconsistent meet the goals mandated by TEA 21. designed to help ensure the safety of with actions taken by the agency with Considering both of these factors, we unbelted occupants in crashes where respect to other requirements in this included a reduced number of tests in occupants may be out-of-position and rulemaking. our November 1999 SNPRM and in our very close to the air bag. Occupants may The Consumer Groups requested that May 2000 final rule. move forward toward the air bag in we require manufacturers to meet a 56 While the final rule for advanced air crashes with soft pulses and/or as a km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test with bags includes fewer tests than our result of pre-crash braking before the air the 5th percentile adult female dummy original proposal, it nonetheless bag deploys. as well as the 50th percentile adult male specifies an unprecedented number of On the passenger side, the vast dummy. new tests, and mandates a much more majority of deaths and serious injuries Protection for unbelted 5th percentile comprehensive assessment of air bag from air bags have been to young adult females in oblique crashes. The protection than the earlier version of children. The rule requires vehicles to Consumer Groups also objected to the Standard No. 208. In the past, the meet requirements for minimizing these fact that the final rule does not specify standard assessed air bag protection risks, primarily by either automatically that the rigid barrier tests using 5th solely by means of rigid barrier crash turning off the air bag in the presence percentile adult females are conducted tests (or a temporary sled test) using a of young children or deploying the air at angles but are instead only conducted single size of test dummy positioned bag in a manner much less likely to in the perpendicular mode. They argued well back from the air bag. The final cause serious or fatal injury to out-of- that in specifying oblique testing only rule adds an entirely new series of tests position occupants. If they so wish, using 50th percentile adult male to assess low speed risk to occupants of manufacturers may choose to use a dummies, the agency assumes that if the many different sizes. For the first time combination of those two approaches. male is protected, so will the female. in the history of Standard No. 208, the There is also an option for a feature that The Consumer Groups argued that this agency will use dummies representing a suppresses the air bag when a child is logic has led to many small women 12-month-old infant, a 3-year-old child, out-of-position (including in dynamic being killed by air bags. These a 6-year-old child, and a 5th percentile events). petitioners stated that an oblique test of adult female. All of these new dummies Manufacturers that decide to turn off the 1997 Dodge Caravan conducted by will be used in assessing risk of air bags. the passenger air bag in the presence of NHTSA shows that interaction of the air For the belted and unbelted tests young children will use weight sensors bag with the anatomy of small women assessing high speed protection, and/or other means of detecting their can lead to fatal air bag injuries. performance will be evaluated using presence. To test the ability of those The Consumer Groups requested that both the mid-sized male dummy means to detect the presence of we specify that vehicles must satisfy the positioned well back from the air bag children, the rule specifies that child requirements of all barrier tests in both and the new 5th percentile female dummies be placed in child seats that the perpendicular and oblique modes. dummy positioned as far forward as the are, in turn, placed on the passenger seat. It also specifies tests that are 2. Agency Response to Consumer seat and/or vehicle interior allows. Also, conducted with unrestrained child Groups’ Requests a new belted offset test using the 5th percentile female dummy will help dummies sitting, kneeling, standing, or As we address the Consumer Groups’ ensure that vehicle manufacturers lying on the passenger seat. requests for additional tests, we begin upgrade their crash sensing and The ability of air bags to deploy in a by noting that no matter how many tests software systems, as necessary, to better low risk manner is tested using unbelted we include in Standard No. 208, it address soft crash pulses. child dummies placed against the would always be possible to identify With this background in mind, we instrument panel. The air bag is then additional tests that represent potential will address the specific requests of the deployed, and specified injury criteria real world situations. However, as we Consumer Groups. performance limits must be met. explained in the final rule preamble, it Protection for unbelted occupants in To address the risks air bags pose to is necessary to strike a balance between crashes with soft pulses. As discussed out-of-position drivers, the rule requires ensuring that there are sufficient tests to earlier, the Consumer Groups argued vehicles to either have a driver air bag meet the need for safety, and avoiding that the final rule does not require that is deployed in a manner much less unwarranted compliance burdens. protection for unbelted occupants in likely to cause serious or fatal injury to We note that some of the additional crashes with soft pulses, where the air out-of-position occupants or to have a tests requested by the Consumer Groups bag may deploy late and strike an out- feature that suppresses the air bag when are ones that we dropped during the of-position occupant who has moved a driver is out-of-position (including in course of the advanced air bag forward in the crash before the air bag dynamic events). The ability of air bags rulemaking. After considering the deploys. They asked that we require that to deploy in a low risk manner is tested comments on our original September the 0–40 km/h (0–25 mph) offset using unbelted 5th percentile adult 1998 NPRM, we tentatively concluded deformable barrier test be conducted female dummies placed against the that we could reduce the number of with unbelted rather than belted steering wheel. originally proposed tests without dummies. In considering the Consumer The Consumer Groups did not present significantly affecting the benefits of the Groups’ petition, we have considered any analysis to support their contention rule. We were persuaded by the both the possibility of changing the test that these requirements are inadequate, commenters that reducing the amount of from a belted test to an unbelted test, or to support their assertion that testing was important, given resource and of adding an unbelted test in suppression devices are likely to be limitations and the costs to addition to the belted test. Afooled’’ into false readings. Moreover, manufacturers associated with certifying In developing the advanced air bag we disagree with their characterization vehicles to such a large number of new rule, we focused a great deal of attention of the final rule as containing ‘‘only a
VerDate 11
series of static-based tests that are far be sufficient to help ensure that vehicle The test configuration represents a simpler to meet than a dynamic test.’’ manufacturers improve their sensing real world situation where small women The ease or difficulty in meeting a systems. We stated, however, that we who are wearing their seat belts may particular test requirement does not will monitor future air bag system nonetheless be at risk from the air bag, depend on whether the test is static or designs and will consider changing this since they are seated close to the air bag. dynamic, but instead on the overall decision if we find that manufacturers This is a particularly common situation nature of the test requirement. are implementing sensor systems that on the driver side, since small women Moreover, in some situations, static tests optimize performance only for impacts typically need to sit close to the steering can offer advantages over dynamic tests. into the left side of the vehicle. wheel in order to drive the vehicle. For example, by using static tests to The Consumer Groups also did not By specifying that the belted 5th evaluate the ability of a suppression even attempt to demonstrate that percentile adult female dummies are in system to detect the presence of requiring that the 0–40 km/h (0–25 the full forward position in this test, we children, we are able to test many more mph) offset deformable barrier test to be can effectively test whether the air bag potential real world conditions relating conducted with unbelted rather than deploys late. Having the dummy to how children might be positioned belted dummies (or with both belted unbelted would not improve the test. In than if we specified dynamic tests. and unbelted dummies) would result in addition, as noted earlier, the belted As to the petitioners’ concerns about any additional safety benefits, given the offset test may represent a worst case dropping the proposed dynamic out-of- overall array of tests included in the scenario as compared to the unbelted position test option and the rough road advanced air bag rule to improve test. For all of these reasons, we believe tests, we explained in the November protection and minimize risk. it appropriate to maintain a belted 0–40 1999 SNPRM that both proposed tests We added this particular test to km/h (0–25 mph) offset deformable had proven to be unworkable in their encourage vehicle manufacturers to barrier test. existing forms, and that both tests were upgrade their crash sensing and We have also considered the unnecessary for safety. As to the option software systems, as necessary, to better possibility of adding an unbelted 0–40 for a full scale dynamic out-of-position address soft crash pulses. As we noted km/h (0–25 mph) offset deformable test, we explained in the final rule in the final rule preamble, the improved barrier test. Given the wide array of tests preamble that other options included in sensing systems required by this test already included in the advanced air the final rule would accommodate the will benefit both belted and unbelted bag rule, and noting the fact that the various advanced air bag technologies occupants. We also pointed out in the Consumer Groups did not provide any under development. With respect to the final rule that the belted offset test may evidence, we do not believe that there rough road tests, we explained: represent the worst case scenario since would be any significant benefits from the belt allows the dummy’s head and adding this particular test. While rough road performance is certainly After carefully considering the important, we do not believe there is any neck to rotate into the path of the evidence that this is likely to be a real world deploying air bag. This condition may Consumer Groups’ request that the 0–40 problem. It would also be difficult to develop better test for potential neck injuries km/h (0–25 mph) offset deformable a test procedure that would assure that a than an unbelted test. barrier test be conducted with unbelted dummy responded like a human to the forces We also note that the unbelted rigid rather than belted dummies, we decline imparted by a rough road. Indeed, the barrier test using 5th percentile adult to make that change. procedure we had proposed in the NPRM female dummies, conducted at speeds High speed crash protection for 5th turned out to be impractical and did not between 32 and 40 km/h (20 and 25 percentile adult females. The Consumer accomplish its objective. Given our limited mph), and the belted rigid barrier test Groups also argued that the final rule resources, we do not believe there is a need at this time to develop test procedures in this using 5th percentile adult female does not ensure high speed crash area. dummies, conducted at speeds up to 48 protection for 5th percentile adult km/h (30 mph), also help ensure females, since the agency adopted a 56 The Consumer Groups were incorrect protection of occupants who are close to km/h (35 mph) belted test using 50th with respect to their apparent belief that the air bag, since the 5th percentile percentile adult male dummies but the offset test is conducted with a adult female dummies are positioned deferred the decision whether to dummy only on the driver’s side. with the seats in the full forward propose also using 5th percentile adult Dummies are positioned at both the position. female dummies in that test until driver and right front passenger We conclude that it would be additional testing is completed. They positions. inappropriate to change the offset requested that we require vehicles to These petitioners may, however, have deformable barrier test from a belted test meet a 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier meant to refer to the fact that the test is to an unbelted test. As discussed in test with the 5th percentile adult female conducted only with the left side of the previous rulemaking notices, this test dummy as well as the 50th percentile vehicle engaged with the barrier. (The was developed by Transport Canada. adult male dummy. left side of the vehicle is nearly always That agency found in its research that The Consumer Groups are incorrect in the driver side, although the driver sits one of the causes of adverse effects of asserting that ‘‘the final rule requires no 5 on the right in a few vehicles. ) As we air bags is late deployment of some air high speed crash protection for the discussed in the final rule preamble, we bags in crashes with a ‘‘soft crash 5th% female.’’ We note that while believe that testing with the left side of pulse.’’ In order to reproduce the softer, Standard No. 208 has long included the vehicle engaged with the barrier will longer duration crash pulse, it selected high speed crash test requirements the 40 percent offset barrier. Transport using 50th percentile adult male 5 DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency to impact only the driver-side of the vehicle rather than the Canada found that in 40 km/h (25 mph) dummies, the advanced air bag rule left-side. It noted that in some vehicles the driver offset deformable barrier crash tests, the establishes, for the first time, high speed sits on the right. We are not making the suggested air bag typically deployed and was crash test requirements using 5th change. Occupants on both the left and right side sometimes so late that the belted test percentile adult female dummies. For of the vehicle should be protected in an offset crash. However, one portion of the regulatory text, S18.1, dummy would be right on the steering belted dummies, vehicles must meet references the driver side of the vehicle rather than wheel at that time, a ‘‘worst case’’ injury criteria performance limits at the left side. That reference has been corrected. condition. speeds up to 48 km/h (30 mph), the
VerDate 11
same speed that has long been used for test with the 5th percentile adult female are more stringent than the belted 50th percentile adult male dummies. dummy, we decline to take that action. oblique tests in this respect, since the For unbelted 5th percentile adult female However, depending on the results of belts limit occupant movement, and that dummies, vehicles must meet injury our testing, we continue to anticipate the unbelted oblique tests, which are criteria performance limits at speeds proposing to increase the maximum test being retained, will ensure that air bags from 32 km/h (20 mph) to 40 km/h (25 speed for belted tests using the 5th are sufficiently wide to provide mph), the same speed range as will percentile adult female dummy to 56 protection when occupants move apply to unbelted tests with 50th km/h (35 mph), beginning at the same forward at an angle in oblique crashes. percentile adult male dummies. time that the 50th percentile adult male Upon reconsideration, we continue to The final rule does increase the speed is required to be used in belted testing believe that the current array of tests for the belted test using the 50th at that speed. strikes a reasonable balance between percentile adult male dummy from 48 Protection for unbelted 5th percentile ensuring that there are sufficient tests to km/h to 56 km/h (30 mph to 35 mph). adult females in oblique crashes. The meet the need for safety, and avoiding This increase in test speed will be Consumer Groups also objected to the unwarranted compliance burdens. phased-in after the phase-in of the other fact that the final rule does not specify Given the entire array of tests that both requirements for advanced air bags is that the rigid barrier tests using 5th ensure protection and minimize risk, complete, beginning in the 2008 model percentile adult female dummies and in light of the reasons discussed year. include oblique tests. They requested above, we do not believe that adding As we discussed in the advanced air that we specify that vehicles must additional oblique crash test bag final rule preamble, we did not satisfy the requirements of all barrier requirements would produce significant include the 5th percentile adult female tests in both the perpendicular and safety benefits. dummy in this requirement because we oblique modes. We disagree with the Consumer had sparse information on the We note that the oblique tests using Groups’ assertion that in specifying practicability of such a requirement. We the 5th percentile adult female dummy, oblique testing only using 50th stated that we would initiate testing to as well as the oblique tests using the percentile adult male dummies, the examine this issue and anticipated belted 50th percentile adult male agency ‘‘assumes that, if the male is proposing to increase the test speed for dummy, were among the ones we protected, so will the female.’’ Our belted tests using the 5th percentile dropped during the course of the decision reflects careful analysis of the adult female dummy to 56 km/h (35 advanced air bag rulemaking. We were practical effects of the various mph), beginning at the same time that persuaded by the commenters that requirements on air bag design, and the the 50th percentile adult male is reducing the amount of testing was contribution each requirement makes to required to be used in belted testing at important, given resource limitations ensuring protection and reducing risks. that speed. We note that Congress gave and the costs to manufacturers 4. Positioning Procedure for the 5th us money in our FY 2001 budget to do associated with certifying vehicles to Percentile Adult Female Test Dummy research to gather information in this such a large number of new test (Barrier Test) area. requirements. Moreover, looking at the We disagree with the Consumer whole array of test requirements The final rule established a new Groups’ assertion that it is ‘‘arbitrary included in the advanced air bag rule, positioning procedure for the 5th and capricious’’ for the agency to we believed that these tests were percentile adult female test dummy in conduct testing that will help us unnecessary. the dynamic crash tests. This procedure determine whether a 56 km/h (35 mph) As we have explained before, the used the dummy legs’ relationship with belted rigid barrier test requirement primary purpose of oblique tests is to the front of the seat to determine where using 5th percentile adult female ensure that air bags are sufficiently wide the dummy’s H-point would be set. The dummies is practicable, prior to to provide protection if an oblique crash seat would then be moved forward until proposing and adopting such a results in the occupant moving forward the seat reached its full-forward position requirement. We believe that testing at an angle. The test that presents the or until a dummy leg contacted the before imposing a requirement greatest challenge with respect to the vehicle interior. Under the final rule, represents a rational approach to width of the air bag is the unbelted test the legs are moved into position; e.g., establishing safety performance using the 50th percentile adult male the driver’s leg is adjusted to place the requirements. We also disagree with the dummy. foot on the pedal, only after the seat has Consumer Groups’ suggestions that we As we explained in the final rule been moved forward. are being inconsistent as compared to preamble, we dropped the requirement We received several comments and our actions with some of the other for conducting oblique angle tests on petitions regarding various aspects of requirements for advanced air bags, vehicles using 5th percentile adult the 5th percentile adult female dummy such as the out-of-position requirements female dummies because we believed positioning procedure. Mitsubishi and for 5th percentile adult female drivers that if a vehicle can pass the DaimlerChrysler raised questions about and children. The amount of testing and perpendicular test with 5th percentile the relationship between the seat analysis that may be needed to establish adult female dummies and the oblique cushion angle and the seat position. the practicability of a particular tests with unbelted 50th percentile adult Honda commented that not specifying a requirement varies with the requirement male dummies, it would also likely pass seat position before the dummy is at issue. We note, however, that we did the oblique test using 5th percentile placed in the vehicle could lead to conduct significant testing and analysis adult female dummies. We explained repeatability problems. As with the low- concerning the out-of-position further that we dropped the belted risk test conditions, Mitsubishi queried requirements for 5th percentile adult oblique angled tests for the 50th whether the centerline of the seat was female drivers and children. percentile adult male dummy because, the geometric center of the entire seat or After considering the Consumer given the unbelted oblique tests using only of the designated seating area. Groups’ request that we establish a that dummy, we believed that the belted Honda, Mitsubishi, DaimlerChrysler, requirement now for vehicles to meet a oblique angled tests are unnecessary. and the Alliance all had concerns about 0–56 km/h (0–35 mph) belted barrier We noted that the unbelted oblique tests positioning the legs and feet. These
VerDate 11
concerns were focused on placement of difficult to place in a vehicle given their 5. Issues Related to Minimizing the Risk the left foot on the foot rest, early relatively stiff structure. of Injuries and Deaths Caused by Air interference of the dummy legs with the There may be instances where, even Bags steering wheel or column, and the with the new procedure, it is impossible The advanced air bag final rule distance between the dummy’s knees to place the dummy in a full-forward implemented numerous measures when initially positioning the dummy. designed to minimize the risk of serious At the December, 2000 technical seating position. In such instances, we injury or death caused by deploying air workshop, VW asked what seat position will use the new procedure and move bags. On the passenger side, these would be required for vehicles with seat the seat forward until there is no more cushions that could be lengthened or than a 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between measures were directed primarily shortened. Honda noted that in some of the dummy and the vehicle interior. towards small children, while on the its vehicles it could not position the seat Given the variety of vehicle interior driver side, the measures were directed in a full forward position using the designs, we do not believe it is possible toward individuals, primarily small existing procedure. A more general to develop a test procedure that allows women but also other out-of-position discussion followed exploring possible dummy placement in a full-forward occupants, who are close to the air bag solutions to the problem raised by position in every vehicle. However, we at the time of deployment. Because we Honda. have determined that this is not a wished to avoid being unnecessarily We have reviewed the petitions and significant problem. Using the new design-restrictive, the agency provided the seating procedure specified in the procedure, we were able to place the manufacturers with multiple final rule. After experimenting with the dummy in a full-forward position most compliance options to reduce these risks. On the passenger side, we allowed test procedure in several vehicles, we of the time. We did find that in the both automatic suppression and have determined that the seating Dodge Grand Caravan we were only able dynamic suppression systems, as well procedure specified in the final rule to get the seat within one quarter inch should be modified to better address as systems that utilize low-risk of the full-forward position. In the deploying air bags. For the driver side, potential problems in production Dodge Durango, we were only able to vehicles. The primary problem with the we allowed a dynamic suppression get the seat within one-and-one-quarter system or low-risk deployment systems. existing seating procedure is that early inch of the full-forward position. In both dummy contact with the steering wheel, While we are aware of some long- cases, the seat was much closer to the steering column, or knee bolsters can range development work in the area of full-forward position than to the mid- preclude placing the seat in the full dynamic suppression systems, we do forward seating position. As we noted in track position. We do not expect not know of any manufacturers who both the NPRM and the SNPRM, we manufacturers to introduce excessive currently plan on using such systems as believe it is critical to test with the seat molding and contouring into the vehicle a method of certifying compliance with in the most forward designated seating interior to prevent the dummy from the requirements of the final rule. We position because this represents the reaching the full forward position since received no petitions for reconsideration worst case position. A procedure where that approach would invariably have a on that option. We have received the final seat position is closer to mid- negative effect on vehicle sales. People numerous petitions for reconsideration track than full forward circumvents the will not buy cars that they cannot drive. on various aspects of the automatic intent of the final rule. Since the To the extent manufacturers rely on suppression and low-risk deployment existing procedure led to this result in such molding and contouring to keep options. the occupant away from the air bag, they some vehicles, we have determined the A. Automatic Suppression will also have to provide some procedure and the regulatory text Requirements should be changed to address early countermeasure to ensure that contact with interior components. individuals can reach the accelerator Several petitions were filed Rather than requiring the knees be at and brake. If we find that manufacturers concerning the automatic suppression a 90 degree angle when placing the mold the steering column or knee option, most of which addressed the dummy in the seat and moving the seat bolsters primarily to prevent the dummy level of seat belt cinch-down force for forward, we are now specifying that the from being placed in a full-forward the belted test procedures and the knees be placed at a 120 degree angle at position, we may amend the regulation. selection of child restraints. the beginning of the seating procedure. Additionally, Toyota stated that given Other minor changes have been made By changing the initial knee angle, it is the wide variation in ‘‘cushion now possible in most vehicles to move in the seating procedure to ease hardness’’ and ‘‘cover tightness’’ in the seat into the full forward seat placement of the dummy in the full- production seats, it did not believe it position and to have the right foot reach forward seat position and to address the could certify compliance for the 6-year- the accelerator. In some cases, the specific issues raised by the old child using automatic suppression. steering wheel or steering column will commenters. First, the new seating It also raised concerns about the use of still prohibit moving the seat into a full- procedure provides specific information current test dummies for testing forward position. In those instances, we on seat location and configuration prior automatic suppression systems. are now specifying that the steering to placing the dummy on the seat; this wheel be adjusted upwards to facilitate accounts for vehicle seat cushions that 1. Child Restraints dummy placement and that the legs can be adjusted without changing the The primary concern raised by then be splayed if needed. The steering seat track. Second, the legs are petitioners regarding automatic wheel height will be returned to the positioned equidistant from the center suppression systems regarded the belt mid-position prior to running the barrier of the steering wheel rim to improve cinch-down requirement for rear-facing tests. We note that we are making these repeatability. Third, the left foot is now child restraints systems (RFCRS) and changes not because we believe that positioned on the toe board unless it is convertible child restraint systems. The people actually engage in such acts each impossible to maintain that position. In final rule specifies that the car bed, the time they enter their vehicle, but that case, the left foot is placed on the RFCRSs and the convertible child seats because the dummies are much more floor pan. specified in Appendix A to the final
VerDate 11
rule all need to pass certain compliance requested we clarify the time frame that under any Federal motor vehicle safety tests with the child restraints in both a child seats on the list would be used as standards. belted and unbelted condition. In the potential test devices in the agency’s We note that it will likely be belted tests, the seat belt is to be compliance tests. DaimlerChrysler also impossible to maintain a cinch-down cinched down at 134 N (30 lbf) as urged the agency to establish a point in force in excess of 134 N (30 lbf) once the measured at the outboard section of the time, such as the date of certification, at test dummy or child is placed in the lap belt. which the list of child restraints child restraint. The test procedure does Toyota, the Alliance, DaimlerChrysler becomes final for the purpose of not require that the cinch-down force and Takata all commented that they compliance tests. It was concerned that remain stable once the restraint is believed the 134 N (30 lbf) cinch-down it could be responsible for the occupied. This is because the intent force was unreasonable. They argued recognition of child restraints for which behind the 134 N (30 lbf) cinchdown that this force was impossible to achieve the suppression system had not been requirement is to replicate the and often placed the child seat in an designed. installation of a child restraint by unrealistic position. They also argued Finally, DaimlerChrysler introduced individuals who have been trained in that one would not expect to see a child in its petition some clarifying language such installation. Given our ability to seat installed with this level of force in regarding the use of Standard No. 225 consistently achieve a 134 N (30 lbf) the real world. Petitioners urged restraint attachments in vehicles that are force, we continue to believe some NHTSA to adopt a cinch-down force of equipped with such attachments in the installers will install child restraints at 67N (15 lbf), which is currently front seat. DaimlerChrysler also this level. However, once a child is specified in Standard No. 213. Toyota suggested that the automatic seated in that restraint, the amount of posited that perhaps NHTSA was suppression tests be conducted with force applied to the seat belt will ease measuring the seat belt force differently and without tethers, arguing that tethers up. than manufacturers and suggested a can place additional weight on the seat We reject Toyota’s suggestion that we detailed test procedure be provided to and could reflect a ‘‘worst case’’ adopt a maximum cinch-down force of 67 N (15 lbf). As noted by Toyota, this assure that the 134 N (30 lbf) force could scenario. be achieved. is the maximum force required by We have decided to retain the 134 N Additional concerns were raised at Standard No. 213. That standard (30 lbf) cinch-down requirement the technical workshop held in specifies a cinch-down force between December, 2000. Ford observed that a specified in the final rule for all child 53.2 N and 67 N (11.9–15 lbf). The system it is evaluating, which uses a seats except the car bed. The car bed purpose of measuring cinch-down force load cell built into the seat belt system, will be installed in accordance with the is different in Standard No. 213 than in had difficulty differentiating between a restraint manufacturer’s installation Standard No. 208. In Standard No. 213, child seat installed at 134 N (30 lbf) and instructions, and a cinch-down force the intent is to replicate the a large adult occupant that was straining will not be measured. circumstances under which most child against the seat belt. Delphi noted that We believe the primary problem restraints are installed and then to test when RFCRSs were installed without a related to belt cinch-down is the level how well the restraint protects an base at the required force level, the of variability in the load cell occupant when so installed. As such, 67 restraint flipped up against the back of measurement. Indeed, we found at the N (15 lbf) cinchdown force does not the passenger seat unless towels or December 2000 technical workshop that represent a ‘‘worst case’’ scenario for blankets were placed under the the load cell we used provided widely testing the child restraint. In Standard restraint. Isuzu remarked that on one of variable readings. Subsequent to the No. 208, we want to be sure that the air its vehicles, the load cell could not be workshop we obtained a smaller load bag suppression systems in vehicles placed in the position required by the cell that is specifically designed for use perform properly under a worst case final rule because of a sheath that on a seat belt. The smaller load cell is scenario; i.e., when a properly installed encases the belt on the outboard side. designed to measure loads only up to seat that is cinched down in a manner Testing on the Isuzu vehicle provided 447 N (100 lbf), which significantly that might fool an inadequate for the workshop verified that the load decreases the amount of variability in suppression system into believing the cell being used at the workshop did not measurement. With this load cell, we seat is occupied by someone other than fit in the specified location. Finally, our found that consistent results could be a small child. own testing in preparation for the obtained for at least five minutes, We recognize the difficulties Ford is workshop indicated that the 134 N (30 establishing that the load cell was currently experiencing with the load lbf) force level was impossible to measuring force in a repeatable manner. cells that it was planning to use in its achieve with the car bed specified for These readings were above 134 N (30 vehicles. However, we believe testing because that car bed does not use lbf). Additionally, the child restraints manufacturers will be able to improve a rigid structure for feeding the seat belt were positioned in a stable and realistic this type of technology, and note that through the restraint. Indeed, we noted manner. We were able to achieve the even with this technology, the presence that the greater the force placed on the load levels using the test procedure laid of pressure on the safety belt is only one seat belt, the less realistic the test out in the final rule, although in some of the factors considered by the became, because the car bed was tipped instances the plastic button that some suppression system to determine up off the seat and toward the seat back. manufacturers place on belts to keep the whether to suppress. Several commenters also noted that buckle from sliding down on the As for Isuzu’s problems in getting a some of the child restraints listed in the unsecured belt had to be removed. load cell to fit on the seat belt, we note appendix to the final rule were already Thus, we do not believe there is any that it may need to shorten the sheath obsolete. Toyota and the Alliance urged need to change or refine the existing test on the belt to conduct compliance us to reconsider developing a procedure. While we are not adding a testing. As a larger matter, we hope standardized test device that could provision to the regulatory text, we do Isuzu would do this anyway because we provide a common ‘‘footprint’’ for seat- intend to remove the plastic button if it are concerned that its sheath may make based suppression systems. At the prevents us from reaching a 134 N (30 routine installation of some child December workshop, DaimlerChrysler lbf) force. This button is not required restraints unduly difficult. We
VerDate 11
recommend all vehicle manufacturers shall be at least one year from the date of shifting too much weight to the floor consult SAE recommended practice of publication. All vehicles certified on pan, making the weight on the seat J1819, Securing Child Restraint System or after that effective date will need to resemble the weight of the 6-year-old in Motor Vehicles (Rev 11/94) when comply with the standard using the test dummy. designing their seat belts to assure a restraints on the updated list. We DaimlerChrysler opined that the good fit between the vehicle and the believe this one-year leadtime will requirement to make sure any threads child restraint. provide manufacturers with sufficient used to hold a dummy in position do We have decided against changing our time to ensure that their vehicles not interfere with the air bag was overly test procedure to allow the use of rolled comply. Providing an effective date in stringent. It argued that the location of up blankets or towels when installing the text of the appendix will also avoid the thread in relationship to the air bag the child restraint. As noted in the final any confusion as to which set of was irrelevant since the air bag is not rule, we expect manufacturers to design restraints are to be used to test a given deployed in any of the automatic their suppression systems to recognize vehicle. suppression tests. Isuzu noted an the presence of a towel or blanket. We note that some vehicle apparent typographical error in the However, we do not believe we should manufacturers may wish to certify position that tests for a child leaning add a requirement that child restraints compliance with the updated appendix against the door (S24.2.3). It stated that be tested with such objects since that prior to the effective date of the the regulatory text should allow a would significantly add to the appendix. We will allow this type of maximum distance of 5 mm (0.2 in) manufacturer’s compliance burden. We ‘‘early compliance’’ as long as the between the dummy and the vehicle recognize that in some instances testing manufacturer notifies us that it is interior rather than a minimum distance facilities will need to exercise care in irrevocably exercising this option. of 5 mm (0.2 in). applying the cinch load so that the child We believe DaimlerChrysler’s For the most part, we have decided restraint does not shift from the proper suggestion for clarifying language against adopting positioning procedures position. regarding the use of Standard No. 225 more detailed than those in the final We have updated the list of child vehicle restraint attachments improves rule. We want the positioning restraints contained in Appendix A to the clarity of the regulatory text. procedures to be broad to ensure that Standard No. 208, removing those Accordingly, we have adopted those the automatic suppression systems will restraints that are no longer in changes. However, we decline to accept work in the myriad of occupant production. These models have been DaimlerCrysler’s suggestion that we test positions that occur in the real world. removed from Appendix A, and child restraints with any tethers More precision in test positions would replacement restraints have been added. attached. We believe attaching the permit manufacturers to certify We are not adopting Toyota and the tethers would represent the worst case suppression systems that work when Alliance’s suggestion that a common scenario in only one instance; i.e., if the occupants are in the specified position ‘‘footprint’’ test device be developed for automatic suppression system used only but may not work if the occupant were testing automatic suppression systems. the force of tension against the belt to positioned slightly out of this position. As stated in the final rule, passing a determine whether to suppress. In this Accordingly, although the procedures compliance test using a test device that instance, the suppression system could set forth in the final rule may not be is not representative of near-term determine that a heavier occupant was precisely repeatable, this is consistent production child restraints provides no in the seat. However, as noted earlier, with the purposes of the rule and helps assurances that the automatic we do not believe a suppression to assure the proper performance of the suppression systems will actually work technology could depend solely on the suppression systems in the real world. in the real world. The only way to force measured against a seat belt and We have refined the seating procedure relieve this concern would be to require meet all of the test requirements for for the child-lying-on-seat position. As all child restraint manufacturers to suppression systems. Isuzu noted in its petition, the final rule incorporate that footprint into their does not specify a longitudinal position. 2. Dummy Positioning restraints. We decided in the final rule We agree that the position described in that there was no need to be so design The final rule did not specify the final rule may be ambiguous with restrictive, and petitioners have offered extremely detailed positioning regard to the placement of the dummy no new arguments that would lead us to procedures for dummies used in the against the vehicle’s seat back. change our position on this matter. testing of automatic suppression Accordingly, we have added language to We believe DaimlerChrysler’s concern systems. Toyota petitioned that the the regulatory text specifying that the over how a manufacturer can assure a positioning procedure be specified in dummy is to be positioned as far back given vehicle will be tested using the greater detail, particularly the spacing in the seat as possible. restraints on a specific list is valid. between the knees (S22.2.2.6) and the We have also made some changes to Manufacturers are not responsible, as a feet (S22.2.2.5). It also petitioned to the positioning procedure for the test matter of certification, for child change the test procedure that tests for that represents a child kneeling on the restraints that are not included in the a child lying on the seat. Likewise, seat, facing forward (S22.2.2.6). Upon appendix on the date of vehicle Mitsubishi raised questions about how review of the regulatory text, the agency certification. We believe the text of to find the geometric center of the seat believes it makes more sense to state Appendix A is clear in that regard. for determining the location of Plane B where the dummy should be positioned However, problems may arise when the and questioned whether the seat height on the seat before placing the dummy appendix is updated with insufficient was in the mid-position. Toyota on the seat, rather than having the leadtime to reasonably permit requested that Plane B be defined in dummy placed on the seat and then manufacturers to assure compliance of relation to the H-point rather than the only later specifying how it was to be vehicles with the updated list. Other entire seat. placed. Additionally, the requisite 90 than the updated appendix that is part At the technical workshop, TRW degree angle at the knee has proven of this rule, which is effective in 30 presented data indicating that the knee unworkable in vehicles with sloped seat days, we will specify in the text of any angle established in the 5th percentile cushions. This is because keeping the updated appendix that its effective date female seating procedure had the effect spine vertical and the knees at 90
VerDate 11
degrees could mean that the legs do not 3. Use of Humans for Testing Automatic Toyota finds that its automatic fully contact the seat cushion. Suppression Systems suppression systems cannot adequately Accordingly, the reference to a specific Toyota raised several issues in its distinguish between the 6-year-old child leg angle has been removed and the legs petition related to the use of current dummy and the 5th percentile adult are to follow the contour of the seat anthropomorphic test dummies and female test dummy, then it may certify cushion while maintaining a vertical humans in automatic suppression tests. compliance using humans. As noted in the final rule, certifying spine. Initially, it urged the agency to work compliance using humans for Plane B is used to place the child with industry in developing better test recognition purposes constitutes dummies roughly in the center of the dummies because of the recognition exercising a specific compliance option. seat. In defining Plane B in the final problems many automatic suppression Thus, NHTSA must be told whether rule, we specified that the plane would systems have with the current test be aligned along the geometric center of certification to the automatic dummies. Mitsubishi echoed this suppression option was based on the seat parallel to the longitudinal request. Not only are the current centerline of the vehicle. We believe it recognition of dummies or of humans. dummies not physiologically accurate We will conduct our compliance tests may be clearer to specify that Plane B enough to mimic the human form or is aligned along the longitudinal using the type of occupant used by the characteristics, but according to Toyota, manufacturer. We note that centerline of the seat rather than the these dummies shift up the suppression geometric center. We acknowledge that manufacturers will not be able to come threshold when compared to humans of back to the agency, in the event of a in vehicles where the outside seat the same weight. Thus, as many as 50 bolster is larger than the inboard seat noncompliance, and argue that the percent of the tests conducted by or on system would meet the requirements if bolster, the center of the designated behalf of Toyota with the 5th percentile seating position may be slightly another type of occupant were used. adult female test dummy did not detect Likewise, manufacturers cannot use different than the center of the actual the presence of that dummy at the seat. We do not believe this difference humans for some portion of the weight needed to turn off the automatic suppression test for a given will be significant. Accordingly, we suppression system; i.e., to assure that have decided against adopting Toyota’s size child/dummy and test dummies for the air bag would deploy in a crash. other portions related to that size child/ recommendation to use the H-point. We Toyota was dissatisfied with the believe it is appropriate to establish dummy. option that they certify their systems We do not believe it is useful to Plane B as a plane that can be using humans within specified height further restrict the size and weight practically and repeatedly defined. In and weight ranges because it believes ranges of the humans that may be used keeping with our desire to have those parameters allow for too much for conducting compliance tests. As an automatic suppression positioning variation in physiology to make humans initial matter, further restrictions will procedures that are not overly specific, practical test objects. make it more difficult to find surrogates we have decided against adopting a Finally, Toyota maintained that for use in the tests. More importantly, plane that is defined by the H-point NHTSA should specify as part of the adopting narrower parameters has the rather than the overall measurements of regulatory text that it will conduct its potential of reducing the effectiveness of the seat. compliance tests using the test device automatic suppression systems in the As discussed above, the seating used by the vehicle manufacturer when real world. As explained above in our procedure for the 5th percentile adult it certified its system. Thus, if discussion of the positioning procedures female has been changed in various certification was based on tests with for child-size occupants, we believe respects. One of those changes involves human test objects, NHTSA would automatic suppression systems need to changing the initial knee angle from 90 conduct its compliance tests using be very robust. This is why we have degrees to 120 degrees. We believe this humans. Likewise, if the manufacturer refused to adopt more stringent change will largely resolve the problem used a test dummy to certify positioning procedures in many of the addressed by TRW’s presentation at the compliance, the agency would use test automatic suppression tests. The same technical workshop. We also note that dummies in running its compliance rationale applies here. using humans rather than test dummies tests. may resolve any lingering problems in At the December 2000 workshop, B. Low-Risk Deployment Options this regard. TRW presented data indicating that the In the final rule, the agency adopted DaimlerChrysler is correct that there seated weight distribution of the 5th the low-risk deployment tests that were is no need to specify that the placement percentile adult female test dummy is proposed in the SNPRM with two of threads used to hold the dummy in sufficiently different from the seated modifications. First, we decreased the position not interfere with the air bag. weight distribution of a seated human speed in the crash test that determines The automatic suppression tests do not who is in the weight and height range the low-risk stage of deployment from involve deployment of the air bag. specified in the final rule. 29 km/h (18 mph) to 26 km/h (16 mph). Accordingly, it is irrelevant where these We recognize there may be some We have already addressed the threads are located relative to the air variations in using humans instead of a comments and petitions for bag. This requirement has been test dummy. As discussed in both the reconsideration that deal with this removed. SNPRM and the final rule, the fact change. Second, we reduced the number Isuzu is correct that the intent of the remains that no physiologically accurate of steps involved in placing the leaning against the door test procedure dummy currently exists. This is why we dummies in a final position because we is to have the dummy contact the door, decided to allow manufacturers to were concerned that small variations in not to avoid contact. Thus, the certify compliance with the automatic the procedure, as well as specific requirement for a minimum distance suppression requirements using either vehicle configurations, could lead to from the vehicle interior has been the existing test dummies or human significant variations in final placement changed to specify a maximum beings. Thus, while we note Toyota’s of the dummy. Since the only position allowable distance from the vehicle concerns, we see no alternative beyond we are interested in is the final one, it interior. what is already in the final rule. If seemed reasonable to specify that
VerDate 11
position and not address how it was determine how the dummy would compliance perspective. Measuring reached. However, we retained, with respond in all the possible seat injury criteria for a specific period of slight modifications, the step-by-step positions. The Alliance suggested the time is the most objective way to assure procedure proposed in the SNPRM for test last until the dummy was no longer that the requisite injury criteria are met the head-on-instrument-panel test in contact with the air bag or 300 ms, for the duration of the test. position because we believed it was whichever occurs first. As noted in the preamble to the final impossible to specify a final position for DaimlerChrysler argued that since the rule, we do not believe that all dummy that test with sufficient clarity. We also 300 ms range was not included in either contact with the vehicle interior would set the test duration at 300 ms, as the NPRM or the SNPRM, commenters necessarily be the result of dummy measured by the point where the air bag did not have sufficient opportunity to interaction with an overly aggressive air is signaled to deploy, taking into comment on it. bag. Nevertheless, we are concerned that account DaimlerChrysler’s observation We adopted the 300 ms time duration peak injury measurements that are that peak injury readings could occur after DaimlerChrysler commented that recorded early in the crash event could after the 100 ms time frame proposed in the 100 ms time duration proposed in be the result of an air bag propelling the the SNPRM. the NPRM was insufficient for some air dummy backward with excessive force. We received several petitions bag systems. Contrary to Likewise, we are concerned that with a regarding the test procedures for both DaimlerChrysler’s assertion, the issue of multiple-stage air bag, those stages that the driver and passenger low-risk time duration for low risk deployment are deployed later in the crash event deployment tests, as well as the 300 ms tests was raised in the SNPRM and the could be sufficiently aggressive to cause time frame specified in the final rule for 300 ms requirement was adopted in injury. The test duration for low risk those tests. Additionally, several issues light of the comments to that document. deployment tests should accurately regarding the low-risk deployment test Because of the concerns originally reflect the propensity of the deploying procedures were raised at the December raised by DaimlerChrysler, we continue air bag to harm an occupant while it is 2000 technical workshop. More detailed to believe a time duration less than 100 deploying. Thus, we are adopting a time discussions are given below that ms would be too short. duration for the low risk deployment directly address the petitioners’ specific We adopted a specific period of time test of 125 ms from the initiation of concerns. for measuring injury criteria because we deployment of the final stage air bag do not want manufacturers to claim that that will fire in a 26 km/h (16 mph) 1. 300 ms Test Duration a test is over for compliance purposes crash. We believe this time frame will In the final rule, we extended the even though air bag-related injuries are adequately measure air bag-related period of time for which we would possible. In order to address the injuries without penalizing collect data from the proposed 100 ms petitioners’ concerns, NHTSA reviewed manufacturers for injuries sustained by to 300 ms, relying in large part on its out-of-position tests to determine if vehicle contact that is unrelated to the DaimlerChrysler’s comments to the there is a need to further truncate the air bag deployment. However, we intend SNPRM that the proposed 100 ms data. We reviewed twelve tests to monitor our test data to determine timeframe was too short to allow conducted at VRTC. Seven of the twelve whether all air bag-related injuries are clearance of the dummy from the air bag tests were conducted with a 5th in fact being included within the in some systems. percentile adult female dummy in the specified time period. If they are not, we Several petitioners, including Toyota, driver position, and five were may consider increasing the period of the Alliance, TRW, and DaimlerChrysler conducted using the 6-year-old child time for measuring injury criteria in the have argued against the extension of the dummy on the passenger side. In the compliance tests. 300 ms data acquisition requirement for seven driver tests the sole failure mode We believe that currently measuring injury criteria in the low risk was Nij, with the latest failure occurring manufacturers would not deploy the last deployment tests. Toyota, Takata, and at approximately 40 ms. The earliest stage of an air bag more than 100 ms the Alliance argued that data should moment of contact with the vehicle after first initiating an air bag only be counted prior to impact of the interior was at 62 ms, and the earliest deployment. Thus, the injury criteria head, neck and torso with interior point at which the dummy was clearly would likely only be measured up to components other than the air bag. no longer in contact with the air bag was 225 ms, and often for an even smaller Toyota indicated that its dynamic tests at 58 ms. In the five passenger tests period of time. Vehicle manufacturers showed that interaction with these other there were HIC, chest deflection, Nij, will be required to provide NHTSA with interior components were not neck tension, and neck compression the time interval between the initial significant. However, in its static tests, failures. The earliest contact with the signal to deploy the air bag and the the peak injury values were the result of vehicle and the earliest clear indication initiation of the final stage of dummy interaction with these that the dummy was no longer engaged deployment so that we will know when components. Arguing that the dynamic with the air bag were both at to stop counting the injury tests better represent actual crash approximately 50 ms. Two of the five measurements. We note that the 300 ms events, Toyota stated that the data tests had peak neck injury readings after time duration remains in full effect for produced as a result of interaction with 50 ms, with the latest peak all barrier tests. interior components other than the air measurement recorded at 104 ms. bag were of little consequence and We are not adopting the 2. Seat Positioning should not be counted. Toyota, Honda recommendation made by the Alliance Toyota requested that all the low risk and VW noted that their primary that injury criteria be measured for 300 test procedures incorporate specific seat problem with the 300 ms time frame ms or until the dummy is no longer in positions. They argued that more was that the lack of requirements contact with the air bag, whichever specificity was needed to achieve regarding seat track, height, and seat occurs first. We believe this proposal to repeatable results. At the public back angle made it impossible for them subjectively determine when the workshop, other participants echoed to determine whether a dummy could dummy is no longer in contact with the this request, stating that the lack of seat meet all applicable injury criteria for air bag is inherently nonobjective, and position requirements, when coupled that period of time since they could not would be unmanageable from a with a 300 ms test duration, prevented
VerDate 11
them from controlling injury low risk deployment test. Injury In a recent meeting with the agency, measurements after the dummy’s head measurements are not recorded. DaimlerChrysler changed its position and chest had cleared the air bag. They Once the appropriate level of and suggested that the dynamic portion said they would need to test in all deployment has been determined, the of the test could be run with the 5th possible seat positions to ensure that a specified static low risk deployment test percentile adult female dummy on the dummy rebound would not cause is run for each of the dummies for passenger-side and the 50th percentile unacceptably high injury measurements. which the manufacturer has certified to adult male dummy on the driver-side. We believe we have largely resolved the low risk deployment option, and While DaimlerChrysler did not provide the petitioners’ concerns regarding the injury criteria are measured. The static a basis for its change in position, location of the seat by reducing the low risk deployment tests are conducted Volkswagen and BMW reiterated this duration of the low risk deployment with a 5th percentile adult female at the potential approach in subsequent tests. However, because we are rejecting two specified positions on the driver meetings and provided a basis for a test duration that is defined by when side and either a 6-year-old child, or 3- making the change. All three the dummy clears the air bag, we year-old child dummy at the two manufacturers expressed concern with believe there may still be value in specified positions on the passenger the ability of current automatic specifying the seat position. side (the manufacturer may use a suppression technology to reliably Accordingly, seat track, seat height, combination of automatic suppression differentiate between a 6-year-old child head restraint, and seat back angle are and low risk deployment systems). and a small adult in real world The purpose of determining now all specified in the positioning conditions. Volkswagen and BMW compliance with the injury criteria procedures for each of the low risk indicated that the occupant recognition using the 5th percentile adult female deployment tests. technology that they had studied can dummy on the driver side and with the reliably differentiate between a small 3. Tests to Determine Which Stage of 6-year-old and/or 3-year-old dummies adult and a mid-size adult male. They Deployment Will Be Used in the Low on the passenger side is to ensure that expressed confidence that they could Risk Deployment Tests the low risk deployment is sufficiently employ a low-risk deployment strategy benign to prevent air bag-related serious that would assure all children and small The final rule requires all vehicles injuries or fatalities to the entire adults would receive the benefit of a certified to the advanced air bag population of individuals who are benignly deploying air bag at low requirements pass a static low risk exposed to a low risk deployment in a speeds, while larger occupants could be deployment test or dynamic low-speed crash. Compliance with the provided with an air bag that deployed suppression test on the driver side and injury criteria is determined using only with more force. This design strategy a low risk deployment, automatic the dummies that represents historically would allow the manufacturer to suppression test, or dynamic the most-at-risk individuals within the provide protection to the larger suppression test on the passenger side. greater population because requiring occupant, while minimizing the risk of These requirements are consistent with tests using all the dummies represented injury to smaller occupants. All three TEA 21’s mandate to reduce the risk of by the greater population would be manufacturers stated that they would air bag injury to all front-seat occupants overly expensive. In issuing the final suppress the air bag in the presence of in low speed crashes, particularly small rule, we assumed that heavier an infant. women and children. individuals would not be seriously Accordingly, we have decided to The low risk deployment test actually injured by an air bag that meets the specify that the dynamic portion of the consists of two different types of tests, injury criteria for the smaller dummy. low risk test be run with the 5th a dynamic crash test and a static low DaimlerChrysler petitioned us to have percentile adult female on the risk deployment test. Each type of test the dynamic tests run with the dummies passenger-side. Because we do not want serves a specific purpose. which will be used in the static low risk manufacturers to rely on a seat-track Prior to conducting the various static deployment tests rather than with a 50th based system to assure a low risk low risk deployment tests, the percentile adult male dummy. deployment at speeds up to 26 km/h (16 manufacturer must first determine DaimlerChrysler’s petition for mph), we are further specifying that the which stage or stages of the air bag to reconsideration made four arguments: test may be run with the passenger seat deploy in the static low risk test. This the sole purpose of the dynamic test is in any seat track position. is determined by running a dynamic, to determine what stage air bag to Low risk deployment options on the frontal barrier crash test at 26 km/h (16 deploy in the static low risk deployment driver side remain the same as in the mph) (except for the 12-month-old child test; using the 50th percentile adult final rule. This is because there are not dummy, where the dynamic test is run male test dummy is inconsistent with the same practicability concerns as there at 64 km/h (40 mph)). Under the May the use of the 12-month-old dummy in are on the passenger side and because 2000 final rule, all of these dynamic the dynamic portion of the infant low no one needs the full-powered risk deployment test; the agency failed tests, except for the one involving low deployment of a driver air bag in low to consider the impact of using the 50th risk deployment technology for infants, speed crashes. percentile adult male in the dynamic are run using an unbelted 50th portion of the non-infant low risk 4. Test Procedures for the Passenger Air percentile male dummy in the mid-track deployment tests; and reducing the size Bag seat position.6 The use of the 50th of the dummies used in the dynamic As discussed briefly above, the percentile male dummy in the dynamic portion of the low risk deployment tests positioning procedure for the chest-on- crash test effectively makes crash speed will resolve many of its concerns instrument-panel test was revised the sole determinant of which stage or regarding the size of the gray zone significantly in the final rule. The stages of the air bag fires in the static between the low risk deployment tests procedure for the head-on-instrument- and the barrier tests since it will be able panel test was largely adopted as 6 In the infant test, the test is conducted with the 12-month-old child dummy in a belted rear-facing to design low risk deployment systems proposed in the SNPRM. The Alliance child restraint, since this is the only risk group the based on occupant recognition rather stated in its petition that neither test requirement attempts to protect. than on crash speed alone. position assured that the dummy’s head
VerDate 11
or chest would actually be positioned possible to do so. This request was strike the windshield before the chest is against the instrument panel, similar to the one made by positioned near Plane C. Second, if the contradicting the intent of the original DaimlerChrysler in its petition that the air bag were a top-mounted air bag, such ISO positions on which they were legs of the 6-year-old dummy only be an air bag could establish Plane C based. removed when necessary, as the substantially higher than it would be in removal of the legs could affect the a mid-mounted air bag. In these a. Chest-on-Instrument Panel Test dummy kinematics in a manner that instances, the chest-on-instrument panel Procedure may not be representative of a 6-year- test may test the effect of the air bag on While the petitions addressed both old child. the head and neck twice. The dummy the head-on-instrument panel and chest- Several petitioners and commenters would be positioned further away from on-instrument panel test positions, the asked for seat position requirements for the air bag than in the head-on- greatest criticism was leveled against the chest-on-instrument panel test instrument panel test, so it is likely that the chest-on-instrument panel position. procedure. We did not specify seat the chest-on-instrument panel would While Toyota and the Alliance requirements for this test because the produce lower injury measurements expressed general concerns about the seat is not used in positioning the test than the head-on-instrument panel test. test procedure in their petitions, the dummy. The primary concern on the However, it is possible that the most comprehensive analysis was part of petitioners is that the lack of a particular kinematics may result in a provided by TRW. TRW noted that specified seating position may lead to greater stress on the neck. Accordingly, when both the 3-year-old and the 6- excessive test variability that is we will be paying particular attention to year-old test dummies are initially unrelated to air bag design, particularly the test results from this chest-on- positioned as required and then moved if injury criteria are to be measured for instrument panel test, particularly in forward, it soon becomes impossible to 300 ms. Our resolution of this issue was vehicles with top-mounted air bags. keep Point 1 in Planes C (a horizontal discussed earlier. We have decided against allowing plane) and D (a vertical plane) as We believe the primary problem with manufacturers to leave the legs on the specified by the regulatory text because the seating procedure specified in the 6-year-old dummy in vehicles that will of contact with the windshield. The final rule is that it starts with the accommodate the entire dummy in this problem is more acute with the 6-year- dummy in an elevated position and then position. Having the legs attached in old dummy than with the 3-year-old moves the dummy forward along a some but not all compliance tests could dummy, although it can occur with horizontal plane. The SNPRM had lead to different injury measurements, either dummy depending on vehicle proposed a test procedure where the because of the different dummy design. While the regulatory text then dummy was positioned against the kinematics. We believe it is critical that specifies that the dummy may be instrument panel and then moved up. all vehicles should be tested using the lowered until there is a 5 mm (0.2 in) We have reevaluated both positioning same test procedure. clearance from the windshield, TRW procedures and believe that the noted that the text does not then say procedure proposed in the SNPRM b. Head-on-Instrument-Panel Test whether to continue to move the largely resolves the problems Procedure dummy forward along a diagonal plane experienced by petitioners. The The final rule specifies placement of until there is contact with the regulatory text has also been simplified the 3-year-old and 6-year-old test instrument panel, or to leave the to make the positioning procedure dummies such that the head is located dummy in that position. Leaving the clearer. In response to VW’s question, on the instrument panel. This test dummy in that position may result in the instrument panel would include any procedure was challenged by several the chest being a considerable distance handgrips that are within Plane D. petitioners and commenters. Honda from the instrument panel. Moving the Under the new test procedure, there commented that it believed differences dummy along a diagonal plane until may be some instances where the center in the dummy’s leg position could affect there is contact with the instrument of the chest, as indicated by Point 1, the kinematics of the crash and the panel may mean that Point 1 is will not be in the same horizontal plane injury measurements. It noted that it significantly lower than Plane C, the as the center of the air bag, as indicated believes that this is particularly horizontal plane located at the center of by Plane C. This will be more likely in troublesome with top-mounted air bags. the air bag tear seam. TRW noted that vehicles with top-mounted air bags. In Honda maintained that the positioning this is particularly problematic in that instance, we believe it is more procedure for the head-on-instrument vehicles with top-mounted air bags important to place the chest against the panel test calls for rotating the dummy because Plane C is on or near the top of instrument panel, than to establish thighs and legs in a manner that does the instrument panel. It is also a Point 1 in Plane C. The only way to not sufficiently control the positioning problem in vehicles with deeply sloped assure that Point 1 remains in Plane C of the legs. It offered no suggestions, windshields because contact with the and that the chest maintains contact however, on how to resolve its windshield occurs relatively quickly. with the instrument panel in all concerns. Toyota and TRW raised These concerns were echoed by Honda vehicles would be to remove the questions regarding dummy movement and Autoliv in their late submissions windshield for vehicles with top- after contact has been made with the and by other manufacturers at the mounted air bags. We believe this is an instrument panel. They noted that if the December 2000 technical workshop. inappropriate test condition. dummy were not moved once contact At that workshop, VW inquired as to It is possible that even with the new was made, the dummy could be a whether a handgrip mounted on the positioning procedures, there may be considerable distance from the front of the instrument panel would be instances where the deployment of the instrument panel. This is because the considered as part of the instrument air bag will be closer to the dummy’s knees could strike the instrument panel panel for the purpose of these tests. VW head than Point 1. We believe that two early in the positioning process, and the also queried whether it could place the vehicle designs could lead to such a chest or head would still be some legs of the 6-year-old dummy back on scenario. First, if the windshield were distance from the instrument panel. the dummy after the final position had severely sloped at a position rearward of Toyota and TRW urged us to change the been reached in vehicles where it was the instrument panel, the dummy could regulatory text to accommodate an early
VerDate 11
knee contact. At the public workshop, chest plate of the dummy on the relationship to the actual location of the some participants, primarily Honda and midsagittal plane). air bag opening beneath the dashboard. Toyota, urged us to specify that the Questions were raised at the Additionally, many dashboards have no dummy be pushed forward once initial workshop about referencing Point 1 discernable air bag cover, and the air contact was made while others, from a rigid structure on the dummy, bag enters the occupant compartment primarily DaimlerChrysler and VW, such as the shoulder joints, rather than through a tear in the dashboard. At the urged that movement of the dummy a point on the chest jacket. Several technical workshop, the agency stop once initial contact was made. The petitioners, including TRW, attempted to garner some consensus primary difference in opinion was due DaimlerChrysler, and Toyota sought among industry on a better definition to concerns on the part of some clarification of what the agency meant that would establish the vertical and participants that moving the dummy by the term ‘‘geometric center of the horizontal planes along a point that was forward could change the leg angle, right air bag tear seam’’. They noted that centered on where the air bag deployed. which they believe could lead to wide many passenger systems do not have a No one was able to come up with a variations in the final placement of the true tear seam. Rather, they may have a location that was readily dummy on the instrument panel. Those cover that opens as part of the understandable and that was easily supporting the continued movement of instrument panel. The air bag may not measured. the dummy argued that it was more be centered under the cover. Likewise, We do, however, believe that it would important to get the dummy against the the instrument panel may be a solid be more appropriate to specify that the instrument panel than to maintain a surface with no visible tear seam. In planes be established using the level leg position. both of these instances, the ‘‘geometric geometric center of the opening through Honda failed to provide any data center of the right air bag tear seam’’ is which the air bag deploys into the indicating that more specific leg difficult to determine and could vary occupant compartment. This would not positioning procedures are needed. We depending on who is conducting the necessarily be the same as the geometric acknowledge that the angle of the femur, test. Finally, at the technical workshop, center of the air bag cover. Rather, it as measured against the spine, could DaimlerChrysler requested that Plane D would be the geometric center of have some effect on the abdomen. be established relative to the geometric whatever frame or casing is used to However, we do not believe that slightly center of the seat rather the geometric allow the air bag to deploy in a different angles would lead to center of the air bag. This would allow controlled manner. Since this frame or inconsistent HIC or Nij measurements, them to take advantage of various casing cannot be seen without the most critical injury criteria for this countermeasures, such as a slight offset, dismantling the dashboard, we intend to test. Thus, we have decided against that they use to reduce the aggressivity ask vehicle manufacturers to give us the adopting more specified leg positioning of the passenger air bag. location of the air bag opening as part procedures. Likewise, we have decided We have redefined the location of of our pre-compliance test information against adopting the recommendation of Point 1 to place it in a location relative requests. VW and DaimlerChrysler that the leg to the upper edge of the chest jacket The final rule specifies that the remain parallel to the floorpan, when rather than the center of the chest/rib dummies be held in place using thread. maintaining that position would result plate. The chest jacket, while relatively Toyota requested specific definitions in the head not being placed on the snug, still moves about the dummy’s related to the material properties of the instrument panel. We believe it is ribcage. Thus, the center of the chest/rib thread. TRW asked that the specification critical that the head be in contact with plate may be different relative to the for thread be removed, arguing that the instrument panel, even if the legs internal hardware from one test to other materials, such as tape, could must be rotated out of a horizontal plane another. The upper edge of the chest work just as well. We agree with TRW. to achieve contact. Thus, under the new jacket, however, remains largely the The material properties of the binding is test procedure, early leg contact does same, making it a preferable point of irrelevant as long as it holds the dummy not prevent placement of the dummy reference. We decided against in place for the duration of the low head on the instrument panel. Instead, measuring Point 1 relative to fixed speed deployment tests. Thread was the dummy is rotated forward until hardware because we do not believe that merely specified because that is the contact is achieved. While in some degree of specificity is required and material the agency has traditionally instances, this rotation could result in a because there is very little exposed fixed used. The regulatory text has been relatively severe leg angle, as measured hardware. Point 1 is now located on the changed to remove the specification for against the pelvis, we believe it is more front of the dummy chest jacket on the thread. critical that the head contact the midsagittal plane by measuring a certain We have chosen not to use the instrument panel than that this angle distance along the surface of the chest geometric center of the seat as a remain constant. skin from the top of the skin at the reference for Plane D. We have changed neckline. the definition to ‘‘* * * vertical plane c. Definition of Points, Planes and We agree that the final rule is not as parallel to the vehicle longitudinal Materials clear as it could be in specifying the centerline through the geometric center The positioning procedures for the location of the planes. ‘‘Air bag tear of the opening through which the right low risk deployment tests specify two seam’’ has no technical definition. front air bag deploys into the occupant planes and one point. ‘‘Plane C’’ is Accordingly, the center of the tear seam compartment.’’ We believe this is more defined as the horizontal plane through could be subject to different practical for compliance tests and the geometric center of the right air bag interpretations. More importantly, the removes the problem of defining the tear tear seam. ‘‘Plane D’’ is defined as the apparent air bag opening may be seam. vertical plane parallel to the vehicle considerably different from the opening longitudinal centerline through the from which the air bag initially emerges. 5. Driver Side Air Bags geometric center of the right air bag tear This is because the air bag covers may As with the low risk deployment tests seam. ‘‘Point 1’’ is defined as the center be designed in a manner that best for the passenger air bag, the agency did point of the dummy’s chest/rib plate accommodates the overall shape of the not provide final seat positions for the (the vertical mid-point of the frontal dashboard, with only a nominal test dummy in tests for the driver air bag
VerDate 11
in the final rule. Toyota has petitioned that contacts the steering wheel is a child dummy at a maximum HIC of 779 that detailed seat positions be specified. more objective means of ensuring that and 723, respectively. The Alliance For the reasons discussed in the section the chin does not hook over the rim. argued that these proposed limits were of this document addressing the Accordingly, we have adopted that derived from the new maximum HIC for passenger low risk deployment tests, we change in test procedure. the 50th percentile adult male dummy are adopting specific seat track, head As to its concern with potential pre- using a scaling relationship that rest, seat cushion angles, and seat back loading, we note that Toyota failed to considered the size differences of the positions. Beyond Toyota’s general provide any data addressing the effect of heads of the three dummies. It further request, all other petitions related to the potential pre-loading in its petition. We argued that we did not consistently driver air bag low risk deployment test would agree that, in general, pre-loading apply these scaling relationships when procedure addressed concerns with the is not desirable. However, we believe it establishing a maximum HIC of 700 for chin-on-rim procedure. is very important that the chin actually all three dummies. The purpose of the chin-on-rim test is makes contact with the steering wheel. Petitioners have not provided to determine the risk of injury when a Additionally, we believe that placing biomechanical data to support their person’s chest is directly in the path of the center of the chin directly on the contention that a higher maximum HIC the deploying air bag. The test is steering wheel will reduce the for the 5th percentile adult female conducted with a 5th percentile adult likelihood of any pre-loading. dummy or the 6-year-old child dummy female test dummy. The test procedure Accordingly, we are not changing the is appropriate. Rather, petitioners requires the dummy be moved up off procedure to address the possibility of appear to base their scaling technique the seat and positioned with spacer pre-loading. on the premise that the experimental blocks. The thorax instrument cavity rear face population was the representative size Toyota stated in its petition that the angle is an initial position. We expect in of the 50th percentile adult male head procedure for the chin-on-rim test many instances that this angle will need or that the analysis that produces HIC specified in the final rule did not to be changed to address specific somehow explicitly accounted for head adequately ensure that the dummy’s vehicle designs. This is because we size and the HIC relationship now chin would not catch on the rim of the believe it is very important to position represents only the 50th percentile steering wheel, leading to artificially the dummy parallel to the steering male. While it is true that the mean high neck extension bending moments. wheel before deploying the air bag. head size of the experimental Honda raised similar concerns. Toyota Keeping the dummy parallel serves population is approximately equal to noted that the regulatory text specifies multiple purposes. First, it should that of the 50th percentile adult male, that the chin not be hooked over the largely resolve Honda’s concern that the the head size of the experimental rim, but noted that it believed a more dummy head will impact the population also spans that of the entire detailed test procedure was needed to windshield or header before the adult population. In particular, the prevent the potential problem. It dummy’s chin contacts the steering rim, experimental population correlates with suggested that a point on the chin 40 as well as Mitsubishi’s question on the size of a 5th percentile adult female mm below the mouth be placed at the whether to stop moving the dummy if in about 30% of the cases, with a 50th uppermost edge of the rim. Toyota also steering wheel contact is made before percentile adult male in about 33% of stated that using the seat to move the the head strikes the windshield. Second, the cases and with a 95th percentile dummy forward results in pre-loading it tests for a worst case scenario; i.e., a adult male in about 37% of the cases. the dummy, which it maintains moves direct impact by the deploying air bag. Furthermore, there is insufficient data to the torso roughly 20 mm closer to the Finally, we believe it provides the most develop a statistically significant steering wheel than if only the dummy repeatable test procedure. relationship of how head size modifies is moved forward. Toyota presented no HIC threshold levels, i.e., that the data analyzing the effect of such pre- VI. Issues Related to Injury Criteria smaller size of the 5th percentile adult loading. Mitsubishi queried whether A. Head Injury Criteria (HIC) female head results in a higher HIC forward head movement was to cease if threshold than a 50th percentile adult the dummy chest or torso impacted the In the final rule, we adopted a new male head. Consequently, we believe steering wheel before the head Head Injury Criteria applicable to that there is no need or justification to contacted the windshield. TRW wanted vehicles meeting the new, advanced air provide different maximum HIC levels to know if the dummy is further moved, bag requirements. For the 50th for any sub-group of the adult and in what direction, if the head hits percentile adult male dummy, Standard population, and we continue to support the windshield. It also asked whether No. 208 has required manufacturers to a maximum HIC value of 700 for both the dummy’s thorax instrument cavity certify that the dummy HIC adult dummy sizes. rear face angle needs to be maintained measurement does not exceed 1000 As previously discussed in the during the positioning procedures. when calculated over a period of 36 ms. biomechanical technical report released Honda noted at the technical workshop Under the new criteria, that with the final rule, we have no that the dummy could contact the measurement is now limited to 700, but biomechanics data on the skull fracture windshield or the header long before the is calculated over a much shorter 15 ms and brain injury tolerances for children. dummy’s chin contacted the steering period. The HIC for the new 5th Thus, we scaled the HIC for the 6-year- wheel. Honda questioned whether the percentile adult female dummy is also old child dummy, the 3-year-old child dummy should be moved down so that 700 when calculated over 15 ms, as is dummy, and the 12-month-old child contact with the steering wheel is made, the HIC for the 6-year-old child dummy. dummy based on geometric size and even though this would lower the chest. Lower maximum HIC were established material strength. Since exact scaling is Toyota is correct that the agency for the 3-year-old and 12-month-old inappropriate for the reasons given intended to provide a procedure that dummies. above, judgement was used to determine prevents the chin from hooking over the The Alliance and DaimlerChrysler whether the scaled limits were steering wheel when it published the petitioned the agency to scale the HIC reasonable. The scaled measurement for final rule. We also agree that Toyota’s measurements for the 5th percentile the 6-year-old child dummy was 723, a suggestion to define a point on the chin adult female dummy and the 6-year-old limit slightly higher than that for the
VerDate 11
adult population. However, since the h (30 mph) test and thus could lead excess of 60 g in 56 km/h (35 mph) scaling is an inexact science and much manufacturers to lower the output of the belted tests.8 of this rule is designed to reduce the seat belt load limiters, which would Twenty-six vehicles were tested at risk of death or serious injury to small then require air bags to be repowered in Transport Canada with the 5th children, we believe that raising the order to achieve acceptable injury percentile adult female dummy in both maximum HIC for the 6-year-old child measurements in the 50th percentile the driver and passenger position. The would be inappropriate. adult male test dummy in the 56 km/h seats were positioned full forward. All Agency low risk deployment tests of (35 mph) belted crash tests. dummies in the driver position and 25 dummies in the passenger position seven 1999 model year vehicles DaimlerChrysler also argued that while passed the 60 g chest acceleration limit, indicates that a maximum HIC of 700 for existing seat belt designs can meet the the 6-year-old child test dummy is establishing 60 g as a practicable injury 60 g limit, the levels so closely approach measurement. Only five of the dummies practicable. One hundred percent of the that level that manufacturers cannot vehicles tested in position 1 (chest-on- on the driver side recorded acceleration certify compliance to the belted tests instrument panel) and in position 2 rates greater than 50 g. Three of these with a reasonable margin of compliance. (head-on-instrument panel) measured a dummies contacted the steering rim, maximum HIC of less than 700. These As noted above, the Alliance’s and we have determined that the higher injury levels were obtained in vehicles recommended chest acceleration limit chest g measurement was probably a that have not been designed to the low of 73 g for the 5th percentile adult result of that interaction. In the two risk deployment requirements of the female dummy was obtained using cases where there was no steering wheel final rule. We see no reason to raise the scaling procedures that consider only contact, we believe the higher injury maximum HIC for this dummy. the geometric differences between the measurements were likely the result of very stiff shoulder belts. B. Chest Injury Measurements 50th percentile adult male and the 5th percentile adult female. This scaling These observations were borne out by In the SNPRM, the agency had method discounts any possible decrease the results of the NCAP tests with the 50th percentile adult male dummy. In proposed a maximum chest acceleration in bone strength experienced by an cases where the higher chest for the 5th percentile adult female older driver. Yet we know that older dummy of 60 g. The Alliance acceleration was probably the result of drivers are at increased risk from a contact with the steering wheel, the recommended a maximum allowable deploying air bag. When one allows for chest acceleration rate of 73 g. Instead male dummy experienced low chest the decreased bone mass, the scaled of adopting the Alliance’s proposal, we accelerations at a comparable speed measurement is 61.6 g, only nominally decided to adopt the 60 g limit. This is because it did not strike the steering more than the level specified in the final the same acceleration limit that has wheel. In the two cases where NHTSA been in place for the 50th percentile rule. Additionally, as noted above, any attributed the higher measurements to a adult male dummy for some time. The scaling method will be inexact, and stiff shoulder belt, the male dummy also Alliance’s recommended chest some degree of judgement is required to measured high chest acceleration acceleration limit was obtained using determine how injury criteria should be measurements in the 56 km/h (35 mph) scaling procedures that only considered scaled for different populations. The NCAP tests. There were a number of the effects of the geometric differences tests with the 5th percentile adult vehicles tested in which the chest between 50th percentile adult males and female dummies are intended to acceleration for the 5th percentile adult 5th percentile adult females. We minimize to the greatest extent possible female was well below 60 g, and where determined that considering these the likelihood that an individual would the injury measurements of the 50th factors alone insufficiently accounted be severely injured or killed by a percentile adult male in the NCAP tests for the risk to out-of-position occupants deploying air bag. Discounting the effect earned the vehicle a four- or five-star and to elderly women, who have been of decreased bone density would lead to rating. Accordingly, we cannot accept disproportionately injured by deploying the anomalous event where the most at- Toyota’s argument that a 60 g chest air bags. Accordingly, we adopted a risk population would not receive the acceleration will require repowered air maximum chest g of 60 for the 5th full benefits of the advanced air bag bags to provide protection to the 50th percentile adult female test dummy. systems. percentile male in a 56 km/h (35 mph) The Alliance, Toyota 7 and belted crash test. Petitioners have presented no data to DaimlerChrysler petitioned the agency We have reviewed three vehicle crash substantiate their claim that a higher to adopt the Alliance’s scaled chest tests in which the lower thorax/ acceleration measurement of 73 g. They chest acceleration limit for the 5th abdomen of the 5th percentile adult expressed particular concern over the percentile adult female dummy is female dummy contacted the steering effect the 60 g limit would have in the necessary to avoid repowering air bags. rim, producing high chest g belted barrier test for the 50th percentile However, NHTSA and Transport measurements and low chest deflection adult male dummy. According to the Canada have co-sponsored vehicle crash measurements. In these cases, the close petitioners, the agency’s measurement is tests conducted at Transport Canada to proximity of the dummy’s lower thorax/ far too conservative. They argued that determine whether the petitioners’ the more conservative limit could cause claim has merit. Transport Canada 8 Although Toyota limited its argument that conducted belted barrier tests at 48 km/ repowered air bags would be needed because of the difficulties in meeting the belted 48 km/ 56 km/h (35 mph) belted barrier test using a 50th h (30 mph) with both the 5th percentile percentile adult male dummy, we reviewed the 7 Toyota also recommended the agency adopt adult female test dummy and with the NCAP test results of vehicles tested with a 5th sternal deflection rate (SDR) as the appropriate 50th percentile adult male test dummy. percentile adult female dummy to see if the chest chest measurement rather than acceleration. The acceleration indicate an overly stiff seat belt that agency had initially proposed adopting SDR, but We also looked at NCAP test results for was not designed for smaller occupants. The 5th dropped its proposal in the SNPRM because the vehicles of the same make, model, and percentile adult female dummy registered chest g biomechanics community argued persuasively that production year to determine whether readings that were slightly higher than those SDR was insufficiently developed to be used in either the 50th percentile adult male registered by the 50th percentile adult male compliance testing. We refer the reader to our dummy, but the readings were still significantly discussion of SDR in the SNPRM. dummy were measuring chest g’s in lower than 60 g.
VerDate 11
abdomen to the steering wheel rim III neck has in measuring bending We agree with Toyota that most prevented the lower portion of the air moments. It also averred that using Nij flexion injuries in the real world that are bag from fully inflating. As a result, the with the Hybrid III neck would require the result of inertial loading (i.e., lower thorax/abdomen was not offered manufacturers to place rapidly loading of the neck due to restraints of protection and impacted the steering deploying air bags in vehicles. the torso by seat belts) occur in the wheel rim. We believe that the injury We have decided against either middle or lower cervical spine. criteria selected for the advanced air bag altering or eliminating Nij as an injury However, research indicates that flexion rule should be sensitive to the injurious measurement. A full discussion of and extension bending moments loading mode of steering wheel rim petitioners’ arguments and our response calculated at the occipital condyle are a contact. Chest deflection, measured only to those arguments is provided in the good predictor of overall neck injury at the central upper thorax, and chest technical paper ‘‘Supplement: even though the site of injury was acceleration with a performance limit of Development of Improved Injury located below the occipital condyles in 73 g would not identify these cases of Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced the middle cervical spine (C3–C4).10 steering wheel rim contact as injurious, Automotive Restraint Systems’’ (Docket Additionally, for air bag loading, the whereas a performance limit of 60 g for No. NHTSA–00–7013–3). upper cervical spine has been the chest acceleration would correctly We believe that the dummies do not predominant injury site for both identify this as injurious occupant generate artificially high neck moments children and adults. While real world interaction with the vehicles. in crash tests. Toyota indicated that a data seems to indicate that tension and/ Consequently, we continue to support a review of crash films did not point to or extension are the predominant injury performance limit of 60 g for the 5th likely neck injury, even though high mechanism in air-bag induced upper percentile adult female. injury measurements were recorded. We cervical spine injuries, research has do not believe a review of crash films shown that flexion can also produce C. Neck Injury Criteria is a useful means of determining strain similar upper cervical spine injuries.11 As part of the final rule, we adopted on the neck. This is because when there Consequently, we believe it is a new neck injury criterion (Nij). Nij is a high loading rate and the cervical appropriate to monitor the loads at measures both neck axial force (tension musculature is partially activated, the occipital condyles using the upper load and compression) and neck bending human neck can experience large cell instrumentation, including tension, moments (flexion and extension). Prior extension moments even though the compression, flexion, and extension, to to the issuance of the rule, neck injuries rotation of the head is small.9 Testing at improve safety in both inertial and air were not directly accounted for in VRTC indicated that the moments bag loading situations. barrier tests, although the 36 ms HIC experienced by human volunteers prior Likewise, we disagree with duration did indirectly address to noticeable head rotation were similar DaimlerChrysler’s contention that only concerns with neck injuries in real to the moments registered by the Hybrid axial forces should be measured because world crashes. We rejected III test dummy. The moments the axial force best determines real DaimlerChrysler and Toyota’s experienced by humans in a crash world risk of injury and a Nij arguments in favor of not adopting Nij would be higher because the informal requirement would require smaller or as part of the final rule. Our rationale tests were static tests and because the more aggressive air bags to counteract was largely based on concerns the two neck was not pushed to the point of problems with the Hybrid III neck. We manufacturers had regarding the pain. Thus, we believe that the moments believe there is a good kinematic and suitability of the Hybrid III dummy neck produced by the dummy neck when dynamic correlation between the Hybrid for measuring extension. there is little head-to-torso rotation are III neck and the human neck. The In their petitions for reconsideration, a reasonable representation of what the Hybrid III neck is effective at measuring both Toyota and DaimlerChrysler have human neck would experience in a the risk of neck injury in the real world. reiterated their concerns with the similar crash environment. High moment readings are consistent Hybrid III neck design and with the Likewise, we do not believe that the with injuries resulting from exposure to adoption of Nij as an injury criterion. As neck on the 5th percentile adult female aggressive air bags. DaimlerChrysler in its response on the SNPRM, Toyota dummy produces neck injury suggested that the Thor dummy neck states that it believes the 5th percentile measurements that are not may be more biofidelic, but we note that adult female Hybrid III neck is reading representative of injury risk in real Thor is still under development. If we artificially high neck moments in crash world crashes. Toyota stated that the determine that it is an adequate tests that are not found in tests using the risk of neck injury was roughly the same instrument for compliance testing and is 50th percentile adult male test dummy. among all adult occupants, but that the a better predictor of occupant injury, we It also believes that the location of the 5th percentile adult dummy could not may incorporate it into Standard No. load cell at the top of the neck does not meet the required injury criteria, while 208. Nevertheless, the possibility that an address the likelihood of injury in the the 50th percentile adult male dummy enhanced dummy neck will be available low- to mid-portion of the neck, the could. The neck of the 5th percentile in the future is not a persuasive reason location where it believes most neck adult female dummy was based on a injuries actually occur. Finally, Toyota scaled down version of the 50th 10 Mertz H J and Patrick L M, Strength and noted that a relaxed human neck can percentile adult male dummy. Thus, Response of the Human Neck, Proceedings of the accommodate 15 degrees of rotation there should be no test artifact that Fifteenth Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE Paper between the neck and the head, which manifests in one dummy but not the No. 710855, (1971). Mertz H J and Partick L M, the Hybrid III neck cannot. Due to the Investigation of the Kinematics and Kinetics of other. Whiplash during Vehicle Rear-end Collisions, combination of these concerns, Toyota Proceedings of the Eleventh Stapp Car Crash petitioned that the introduction of Nij 9 See ‘‘Human Tolerance to Impact Conditions as Conference, SAE Paper No. 670919, (1967). be delayed until the bending moment Related to Motor Vehicle Design’’ SAE document 11 Nightingale R W, Winkelstein B A, Van Ee C issues are resolved. DaimlerChrysler J885, July 1986, which states ‘‘* * * the neck can A, Myers B S, Injury Mechanisms in the Pediatric be injured without exceeding its static angular Cervical Spine During Out-of-position Airbag petitioned the agency to measure only range of motion * * * Measures of the neck may Deployments, 42nd Annual Proceedings of the axial force rather than using Nij due to be a better indicator of injury potential [than Association for the Advancement of Automotive problems it believes the current Hybrid angular rotation]. Medicine, (1998).
VerDate 11
to delay action until that neck is automatically relegated to the owner’s restraint would not be detected by an available. While axial force may be an manual because we believed that people automatic suppression system, or that accurate indicator of injury in a single are more likely to read a highly visible an unrestrained child could be in a loading mode, the neck is subject to warning label than an owner’s manual. position that was not detected by the many loading modes in a crash, In response to the NPRM, automatic suppression system. including flexion, extension, fore/aft DaimlerChrysler, GM, and the Alliance If the driver of the vehicle or another shear, lateral bending, and torsion. had all supported the position occupant was aware that the telltale These other loading modes also cause expressed in the preamble to the final should be illuminated whenever the air neck injury in the real world. This is rule. Indeed, the agency’s decision to bag is suppressed, then they could move why the agency adopted the Nij allow additional information was based the child to the back seat. If for some formula, which incorporates the on comments from these entities, as reason that were not possible, the driver relevant measurements for evaluating well as comments from the NTSB and would be aware of the need to either neck injury during frontal impact. We the Center for Automotive Safety. GM, resecure the child restraint, replace the note much of the automotive industry DaimlerChrysler, and the Alliance have restraint if necessary, or place the child has accepted Nij as a valid injury now all changed their original position in the seat such that the air bag system measurement.12 and now urge the agency not only to is suppressed. prohibit any additional information on While a detailed description of how VII. Issues Related to Labels, Telltales, the sun visor, but to limit such the air bag system works would be and Owner’s Manual Information information to the owner’s manual. The contained in the owner’s manual, we are A. Warning Labels basis of the various petitions is that sun concerned that people may not consult their owner’s manual sufficiently to In the final rule we added a new visor labels that carry different recognize that the absence of an warning label that must be used in information may be confusing and may illuminated telltale means the air bag is vehicles with advanced air bags. We result in information overload. The not suppressed. However, a vehicle also discussed in the preamble that we petitioners also stated that allowing manufacturer could place specific would not prohibit additional labels on additional information would be information about the air bag system the sun visor that provided design- inconsistent with our previous position next to the air bag label, where it may specific information on how to use a that warning labels should be uniform be more likely to be read. Alternatively, vehicle’s advanced air bag technology. to maximize the effectiveness of the the manufacturer could determine that The regulatory text, however, did not message. We have decided to allow additional an additional label placed elsewhere in remove the prohibition against adding labels on the sun visor that provide the vehicle, either permanently or as a additional information on the sun visor. We received petitions for design-specific information about a temporary label, best informs vehicle reconsideration for and comments on particular advanced air bag system. We occupants about the vehicle’s air bag both the changed label and on the issue note that advanced air bag systems are system. A manufacturer could also of whether to allow additional different from traditional air bag determine that no additional labels are information other than that required by systems in that those systems may have needed. Accordingly, we have amended the the warning label. Toyota urged us to unique design characteristics. Thus, a regulatory text to clarify that such a keep the existing warning label, except manufacturer could determine that label could be placed, at the for the addition of the statement ‘‘even additional labels may provide crucial manufacturer’s option, on the sun visor with advanced air bags’’, arguing that information that the vehicle owner alongside the air bag warning label. No the advanced air bag technology is not should be aware of. Some systems, particularly those that change has been made to the regulatory yet developed enough to justify a rely on automatic suppression text regarding the permissibility of weaker label. DaimlerChrysler, GM, the technology, may allow the vehicle labels elsewhere in the vehicle because Alliance and Ford have all requested occupant to change the status of the air we have never prohibited labels that that we limit any information beyond bag. For example, in the case of a convey specific, accurate information that in the required label to the owner’s vehicle certified to the automatic about air bags or seat belts in locations manual and that no additional suppression requirement, the required other than the sun visor. However, any information be allowed in the vehicle telltale will not be illuminated in most additional labels, regardless of where interior. Parents for Safer Air Bags asked instances. Under the regulation, the they are placed in the vehicle, cannot be for clarification of the agency’s position. As noted above, S4.5.1(b)(3) prohibits telltale must remain off if an occupant confusing or misleading when read in any information other than an air bag as large as the 5th percentile adult conjunction with other labels required maintenance label or a SUV rollover female is seated in the passenger seat. by this or other standards. The warning label from appearing on the Additionally, the regulation allows regulatory text has accordingly been same side of the sun visor as the air bag manufacturers to have the telltale amended at S 4.5.1 (g). As discussed in the final rule, we warning label, and prohibits any turned off if the passenger seat is empty, have decided against allowing the additional information about air bags or even though the air bag may be existing labels in vehicles certified to the need to wear seat belts on either side suppressed. Thus, an adult may not the advanced air bag requirements. The of the sun visor. However, this was not even be aware of the presence or purpose of the telltale until a child is new label uses a different pictogram and our intent. Rather, as stated in the placed in the passenger seat and the removed two of the warnings that are preamble to the final rule, we intended telltale illuminates. We are confident required on labels not certified to the to allow additional, design-specific that our automatic suppression advanced air bag requirements. The new information on the sun visor and near procedures are broad enough to ensure label does not say that children should the new air bag warning label. We did that the telltale will illuminate in most never be placed in front of an air bag, not believe such information should be instances. However, those procedures because the advanced air bag 12 See ‘‘Recommended Procedures for Evaluating are not representative of all possible requirements are intended to Occupant Injury Risk from Deploying Side Air seating positions or all child restraints. specifically address that risk. We also Bags’’ (August 8, 2000). (NHTSA–99–5098–31) Thus, it is possible that a particular removed the statement that one should
VerDate 11
sit as far away from the air bag as forward of and above the H-point of the We note that the portions of the possible because while this information driver’s and passenger’s seat in their regulatory text dealing with automatic is helpful, we did not believe it forwardmost position. The final rule suppression systems already specify addressed a serious enough safety risk allowed for multiple levels of that a telltale be installed in the vehicle. to merit overcrowding the label. We illumination as long as the telltale Neither the low risk deployment option added an instruction to read the vehicle remains visible at all times to front-seat nor the dynamic suppression option owner’s manual to familiarize oneself occupants of all ages. The telltale need have such a requirement. Nevertheless, with the advanced air bag system in the not illuminate when the passenger seat we believe it is worthwhile to clarify in vehicle. Thus, we do not believe the is empty. the portion of the regulatory text dealing new label is any weaker than the The Alliance, DaimlerChrysler, and with telltale requirements that a telltale existing label, particularly since the Mitsubishi petitioned the agency to is only required in vehicles with vehicle manufacturer may provide more revise the current requirement that the automatic suppression systems. vehicle-specific information in the form telltale be visible to occupants of all We have decided to allow of a label on the sun visor or elsewhere ages, and urged us instead to adopt the manufacturers to abbreviate ‘‘passenger’’ in the vehicle. requirements of Standard No. 101, to ‘‘pass,’’ since we do not believe the Additionally, the agency has Controls and Displays. DaimlerChrysler abbreviation will be confusing when discovered that when S4.5.1(b) was also requested the regulatory text be combined with the rest of the required amended to remove the requirements for clarified to assure that the telltale would text. Allowing ‘‘pass’’ will also allow warning labels in vehicles manufactured be visible to all occupants seated in a manufacturers to meet both the U.S. and before February 25, 1997, the cross- forward-facing position, and that it not Canadian requirements. However, we reference in S4.5.1(c)(2) was not be obstructed by a rear-facing child have decided against allowing changed. Previously S4.5.1(b) set forth restraint. The Alliance requested that manufacturers to use a universal symbol the requirements for air bag warning they be allowed to use the abbreviation indicating that the passenger air bag is labels in vehicles manufactured before ‘‘pass’’ in lieu of ‘‘passenger’’ in the off in lieu of the written warning, February 25, 1997. S4.5.1(c)(1) set forth message text, and DaimlerChrysler because we believe such an action the requirements for the air bag alert requested that manufacturers be allowed would be premature. We note that the label in those same vehicles and cross- to use a universal symbol representing agency has been working on referenced S4.5.1(b)(1). S4.5.1(b)(2) set the status of the air bag rather than a harmonizing Standard No. 101, and that forth the requirements for air bag specified text. Additionally, a universal ‘‘air bag off’’ symbol is being warning labels in vehicles manufactured DaimlerChrysler requested the considered as part of this harmonization on or after February 25, 1997. regulatory text be changed to clarify that activity. It is possible that when S4.5.1(c)(2) set forth the requirements a telltale is only required in vehicles Standard No. 101 is amended, the for the air bag alert label in those with automatic suppression systems. agency may decide to allow vehicles, and cross-referenced We have removed the requirement manufacturers to use a symbol rather S4.5.1(b)(2). In the final rule S4.5.1(b) that the telltale be visible to occupants was amended to drop the requirements of all ages, since such a requirement is than written text. for a label in the older vehicles because nonobjective. We have, however, kept C. Owner’s Manual Information there was no longer any need to retain the requirement that it be visible to the requirement. S4.5.1(b)(2) was occupants whose eyes have adjusted to The final rule requires certain redesignated S4.5.1(b)(1) and the new ambient light conditions. Otherwise, the information be placed in the owner’s label required for vehicles certified to regulatory text has been changed to be manual of vehicles with advanced air the advanced air bag requirements was more consistent with Standard No. 101. bag systems. DaimlerChrysler requested designated as S4.5.1(b)(2). Because there While we do not believe it would be the regulatory text specify that some of were no changes to the air bag alert reasonable to expect an occupant who the required information need only be requirements, S4.5.1(c) was not was not sitting in a forward-facing included in the owner’s manual of amended. position to see a telltale that is forward vehicles with automatic suppression Under the current regulatory text, of the H-point with the seat in its full- systems. We believe DaimlerChrysler S4.5.2(c)(2) could be interpreted as forward position, we see no reason to has raised a valid point and have being limited to vehicles certified to the adopt DaimlerChrysler’s suggestion that amended the regulatory text advanced air bag requirements, even the telltale only be visible to forward- accordingly. though the title to that section refers to facing occupants. We believe that VIII. Issues Related to Phase-in all vehicles manufactured on or after implicit in the requirement is the Requirements for Small Volume February 25, 1997. S4.5.1(c)(1) should recognition that a rear-facing individual Manufacturers have been removed since the original would not be able to see the telltale. cross-reference was removed. We are Since the vast majority of occupants The final rule gave small volume amending S4.5.1(c) to remove the who are not in the forward facing manufacturers, as well as manufacturers reference to vehicles manufactured position are infants, who would not be of vehicles built in two or more stages, before February 25, 1997 and to clarify able to interpret the message, we see no the maximum time allowable to certify that an air bag alert is needed in any need to further specify that the telltale to the new advanced air bag vehicle manufactured on or after that only be visible to forward facing requirements. TEA 21 requires us to date whenever the required air bag label occupants. We do agree, however, that specify that all vehicles manufactured is not visible when the sun visor is in there is a benefit to affirmatively stating after August 31, 2006 must meet the the stowed position. that the telltale cannot be obscured by new, advanced air bag requirements a rear facing child restraint. promulgated by the final rule. The rule B. Telltales Accordingly, the regulatory text has defined a small vehicle manufacturer for The final rule requires a telltale for been amended to prohibit the placement purposes of this exclusion from the vehicles with automatic suppression of a telltale in a location where such a phase-in requirements as manufacturers systems. The telltale has a specified text restraint could prevent a properly- that produce no more than 5,000 and must be positioned in a location seated driver from seeing the telltale. vehicles per year worldwide.
VerDate 11
The Coalition of Small Volume regulation did not define what was dummies satisfy the new injury criteria Automobile Manufacturers (COSVAM) meant by ‘‘throughout the test.’’ In order as maximum injury values even if the petitioned us to expand that definition to clarify the agency’s longstanding vehicles are not certified to the other to manufacturers of no more than 10,000 position on this requirement, we advanced air bag requirements. vehicles per year. Alternatively, it amended this language in the final rule. Alternatively, manufacturers may petitioned that the 5,000 vehicle cap be The regulatory text now requires that continue to certify compliance using the limited to vehicles sold in the United the dummy be contained within the sled test, with its existing injury criteria, States per year or that the 5,000 vehicle outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger or the up-to-48 km/h (30 mph) unbelted cap be averaged over the phase-in compartment until both the dummies barrier test, using its existing injury period. Under the averaged proposal, if and the vehicle have stopped moving. criteria. For vehicles certified to the a manufacturer produced more than DaimlerChrysler argued in its petition new, advanced air bag requirements, 5,000 vehicles in a single year, it could that this clarification constitutes a new only the first test option will be still take advantage of the exclusion as test requirement that was not subject to allowed. We note that, as with all the long as the average of production during notice and comment. It also stated that other compliance options, the vehicle the phase-in was not more than 5,000 the change has no demonstrable benefit manufacturer must advise us of which vehicles per year. or safety need and could have option it has used to certify compliance, We previously rejected COSVAM’s unforeseen consequences. and that election will be irrevocable. position that the appropriate vehicle cap We disagree that the agency’s for small manufacturers be 10,000. characterization of when the test is over C. Cross Reference for Test Duration COSVAM has offered no new arguments for the purpose of dummy containment DaimlerChrysler noted that the that would lead us to change our was not subject to notice and comment. regulatory text incorrectly references position on this. However, we recognize In the SNPRM, we noted that the S4.10 as a cross reference for test that currently only the United States requirement for dummy containment duration for measuring injury criteria. requires advanced air bag technology would remain in effect until the DaimlerChrysler is correct that the under any timeframe. It is highly technician physically removed the proper cross-reference is S4.11. The unlikely that the advanced air bag dummy from the vehicle. We received regulatory text has accordingly been requirements will be required in another no comments on this proposal. The changed. country sooner than in the U.S. Thus, requirement in the final rule that the dummy remain contained within the D. Combination of Standard No. 208’s we believe it is reasonable to limit the Oblique Barrier Test and Standard No. vehicle cap to not more than 5,000 vehicle until both the dummies and the vehicle have stopped moving is actually 301’s Oblique Barrier TestFerrari vehicles produced or assembled by the requested the test speed for the oblique original vehicle manufacturer for the less restrictive than the criteria presented in the SNPRM, although we barrier test in Standard No. 301 be U.S. market per year. This provision reduced to 40 km/h (25 mph). It stated does not apply to registered importers believe the practical effect is the same. Additionally, we do not believe that that prior to the final rule, these two test because they are not original vehicle requirements could be combined manufacturers. Likewise it would not specifying what ‘‘throughout the test’’ means imposes any additional burden because the test configuration and test apply to vehicles produced or speed were the same. Ferrari believes assembled by the original vehicle on vehicle manufacturers. Rather, it merely clarifies the agency’s that the adoption of a 40 km/h (25 mph) manufacturer in one production year longstanding position that the dummy test speed for one, but not both tests, and then imported to the U.S. in the remain fully contained within the now requires additional tests. If it does following production year. not conduct separate tests, Ferrari We are rejecting the alternative that vehicle until the test is definitively over. claims it will be forced to design its manufacturers be allowed to average Since this is not a new requirement, vehicles to meet the Standard No. 208 vehicle production because we believe there are neither any additional benefits test at 48 km/h (30 mph). this alternative is more unwieldy than nor any chance of unforseen the one we have adopted, and because consequences. However, we do believe We recognize that vehicle a dramatic increase in production over that providing a specific frame of manufacturers often ‘‘piggyback’’ a short period of time could average out reference as to when the test is over dynamic compliance tests. They may to 5,000 vehicles and still constitute a helps manufacturers since there cannot run a single dynamic test that can be production volume for a single year of be any doubt about what the agency used to certify compliance to more than substantially more than 5,000 vehicles. means by requiring the dummy to one safety standard. Nevertheless, we do We note, however, that the new criteria remain inside the vehicle A‘‘throughout not agree with Ferrari’s contention that would be easier to meet than this option the test.’’ manufacturers will need to run for any small volume manufacturer that B. Partial Compliance additional tests or certify to the 48 km/ h (30 mph) unbelted barrier test. The 48 sold vehicles anywhere other than in In its petition, Toyota asked the the United States. km/h (30 mph) belted barrier test will agency to confirm its understanding that remain in Standard No. 208 for all IX. Other Issues it could certify vehicles without vehicles until September 1, 2007, when advanced air bag technologies to the 32– A. Dummy Containment a higher belted barrier test speed of 56 40 km/h (20–25 mph) unbelted barrier km/h will be phased in for the 50th In the final rule, the agency defined test in lieu of the sled test. Toyota’s percentile adult male.13 Since the the parameters for the dummy understanding of the partial compliance Standard No. 301 barrier test does not containment requirement that has long option is correct. measure injury criteria, there is no been part of Standard No. 208. Until the The final rule allows manufacturers to reason that a manufacturer could not May 2000 final rule, the requirement certify compliance with the unbelted continue to combine its Standard No. read, ‘‘all portions of the test dummy performance requirements for the 50th shall be contained within the outer percentile adult male dummy using the 13 We hope to propose using the higher test speed surfaces of the vehicle passenger barrier at test speeds between 32 and 40 for the 5th percentile adult female as well, compartment throughout the test.’’ The km/h (20–25 mph) as long as the beginning September 1, 2007.
VerDate 11
301 test and Standard No. 208 belted compliance with the standard, we amendments are so minimal that a barrier test until that time. accept that the data collection for 2001 regulatory evaluation is not required. model year vehicles may have been Rather, readers who are interested in the E. Effective Date for New Data Filtering done without such filters. Accordingly, costs and benefits of advanced air bags Technique we are changing the effective date for are referred to the agency’s Final The final rule specified that injury that portion of the final rule to Economic Assessment for the May 2000 criteria be calculated using a phaseless September 1, 2001. final rule. NHTSA has determined that digital filter. In its comments to the the costs and benefits analysis provided 6. Use of human child to detect the SNPRM, DaimlerChrysler had argued for in that document remain unchanged in presence of an infant using phaseless filters to measure Nij response to today’s rule. and had suggested the regulatory text In the SNPRM to the May 2000 final specify the filters conform with SAE rule, we proposed to allow B. Regulatory Flexibility Act recommended practice J211. The final manufacturers to certify compliance We have considered the effects of this rule expanded on this request and, for with the automatic suppression rulemaking action under the Regulatory the sake of consistency, specified the requirements using children and small Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) use of phaseless filters for measuring all adults because the existing test This action will not have a significant injury criteria. Since no time frame was dummies are insufficiently biofidelic for economic impact on a substantial placed on the use of phaseless filters, all pattern recognition systems to number of small businesses because it the requirement became effective on recognize. We did not propose to allow does not significantly change the June 12, 2000, the effective date of the manufacturers to use infants instead of requirements of the May 2000 final rule. final rule. the newborn or 12-month-old child Small organizations and small In its petition for reconsideration dummies because all tests involving governmental units will not be DaimlerChrysler urged that the effective these dummies have the dummy placed significantly affected since the potential date be changed to September 1, 2001. in a child restraint. We received no cost impacts associated with this rule It argued that the June 12, 2000 effective comments on whether to use infants should only slightly affect the price of date could negatively affect a rather than test dummies, and we new motor vehicles. manufacturer’s ability to certify adopted the final rule without including C. National Environmental Policy Act compliance with vehicles that were infants in S29. Subsequent to the under production as of that date. It also issuance of the final rule, we have NHTSA has analyzed this proposed requested we change the formulation of become aware of occupant recognition amendment for the purposes of the V in the existing sled test (S13.1). technology that relies on the existence National Environmental Policy Act and The purpose of establishing an early of a human to work. We believe this determined that it will not have any effective date was two-fold. First, the type of technology may be, in some significant impact on the quality of the early effective date allows respects, as good as or superior to human environment. manufacturers to earn credits for technologies that rely solely on weight vehicles that meet the requirements of D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) or the pattern of an object on the seat the advanced air bag final rule before to determine whether to suppress the air The agency has analyzed this the beginning of the phase-in. Second, bag. Since the absence of a provision rulemaking in accordance with the the early effective date ensures that the allowing the use of a human infant principles and criteria contained in final rule is published in the Code of would preclude this technology, and Executive Order 13132 and has Federal Regulations in a timely manner. since our only reason for not including determined that it does not have However, the early effective date also such a provision was because we were sufficient federalism implications to imposed a new filtering requirement on unaware of any emerging technology warrant consultation with State and all vehicles subject to Standard No. 208 that required the use of a human infant, local officials or the preparation of a on or after June 12, 2000. we have decided to amend S29 to allow federalism summary impact statement. We decided to specify the use of The final rule has no substantial effects phaseless filters in response to the automatic suppression tests using a car bed and tests using a RFCRS or on the States, or on the current Federal- DaimlerChrysler’s comment to the State relationship, or on the current SNPRM that phaseless filters should be convertible child restraint be conducted with a child between 8.2 and 9.1 kg (18– distribution of power and used for measuring neck injury. We responsibilities among the various local believe it is worthwhile to be consistent 20 lb) and between 61 and 66 cm (24– 26 in). officials. in requiring phaseless filters for all The final rule is not intended to injury measurements. Accordingly, the 10. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices preempt state tort civil actions, except final rule did not distinguish between that the required labels must contain the A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT neck injury measurements and other required text, and no additional text, Regulatory Policies and Procedures injury measurements in specifying and any additional labels cannot phaseless filters. We believe that there NHTSA has considered the impact of misleading or confusing, as specified in is only a negligible difference in this rulemaking action under Executive the regulatory text. calculated injury criteria between data Order 12866 and the Department of collected with phaseless filters and data Transportation’s regulatory policies and E. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act collected without phaseless filters (less procedures. This rulemaking document The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act than 1.0 percent). Thus, we do not has been reviewed by the Office of of 1995 requires agencies to prepare a believe there should be any problem Management and Budget under E.O. written assessment of the costs, benefits certifying compliance with the standard, 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and and other effects of proposed or final even if the data was not collected using Review.’’ The rulemaking action has rules that include a Federal mandate phaseless filters. also been determined to be significant likely to result in the expenditure by While we do not believe the new under the Department’s regulatory State, local or tribal governments, in the requirement will have any effect on a policies and procedures. The agency aggregate, or by the private sector, of manufacturer’s ability to certify concludes that the impacts of today’s more than $100 million annually
VerDate 11
(adjusted for inflation with base year of phase-in have added to the complexity through OMB, an explanation of the 1995). While the May 2000 final rule is of the regulation, particularly as the reasons for not using such standards. likely to result in over $100 million of various requirements and options are The agency is not aware of any new annual expenditures by the private accommodated throughout the initial voluntary consensus standards sector, today’s final rule makes only phase-in. Once the initial phase-in is addressing the changes made to the May small adjustments to the May 2000 rule. complete, much of the complexity will 2000 final rule as a result of this final Accordingly, there will not be a disappear. At that time, it would be rule. appropriate to completely revise significant increase in cost to the private List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 sector. Standard No. 208 to remove any options, requirements, and Imports, Incorporation by reference, F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice differentiations as to vehicle class that Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and Reform) are no longer applicable. recordkeeping requirements, Tires. This final rule does not have any J. Executive Order 13045 In consideration of the foregoing, retroactive effect. Under section 49 NHTSA amends 49 CFR Chapter V as U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor Executive Order 13045 applies to any follows: vehicle safety standard is in effect, a rule that: (1) Is determined to be state may not adopt or maintain a safety ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR standard applicable to the same aspect under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS of performance which is not identical to environmental, health or safety risk that the Federal standard, except to the NHTSA has reason to believe may have 1. The authority citation for Part 571 extent that the state requirement a disproportionate effect on children. If of Title 49 continues to read as follows: imposes a higher level of performance the regulatory action meets both criteria, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, and applies only to vehicles procured we must evaluate the environmental 30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at for the State’s use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets health or safety effects of the planned 49 CFR 1.50. rule on children, and explain why the forth a procedure for judicial review of 2. Section 571.208 is amended as planned regulation is preferable to other final rules establishing, amending or follows: revoking Federal motor vehicle safety potentially effective and reasonably A. By amending S4.5.1 by revising the standards. That section does not require feasible alternatives considered by us. heading, pearagraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) and This rulemaking directly involves submission of a petition for (b)(3), (c), (f) and by adding paragraph decisions based on health risks that reconsideration or other administrative (g). disproportionately affect children, proceedings before parties may file suit B. By revising S4.11(a), S4.13, S6.6, namely, the risk of deploying air bags to in court. S14.1(d), S14.3, S15.3.6 through children. However, this rulemaking S16.3.5.4, S18 and S18.1, S19 through G. Paperwork Reduction Act serves to reduce, rather than increase, S26.4, and S29 through S29.3. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act that risk. C. By revising Appendix A. of 1995, a person is not required to K. National Technology Transfer and The revisions and addition to respond to a collection of information Advancement Act § 571.208 read as follows: by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control Section 12(d) of the National § 571.208 Standard No. 208; Occupant number. This rule does not propose any Technology Transfer and Advancement crash protection. new information collection Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to * * * * * requirements. evaluate and use existing voluntary S4.5.1 Labeling and owner’s manual consensus standards 14 in its regulatory information. H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) activities unless doing so would be * * * * * The Department of Transportation inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., (b) * * * assigns a regulation identifier number the statutory provisions regarding (1) Except as provided in S4.5.1(b)(2), (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in NHTSA’s vehicle safety authority) or each vehicle shall have a label the Unified Agenda of Federal otherwise impractical. In meeting that permanently affixed to either side of the Regulations. The Regulatory Information requirement, we are required to consult sun visor, at the manufacturer’s option, Service Center publishes the Unified with voluntary, private sector, at each front outboard seating position Agenda in April and October of each consensus standards bodies. Examples that is equipped with an inflatable year. You may use the RIN contained in of organizations generally regarded as restraint. The label shall conform in the heading at the beginning of this voluntary consensus standards bodies content to the label shown in either document to find this action in the include the American Society for Figure 6a or 6b of this standard, as Unified Agenda. Testing and Materials (ASTM), the appropriate, and shall comply with the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), I. Plain Language requirements of S4.5.1(b)(1)(i) through and the American National Standards S4.5.1(b)(1)(iv). Executive Order 12866 requires each Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use (i) The heading area shall be yellow agency to write all rules in plain available and potentially applicable with the word ‘‘WARNING’’ and the language. Standard No. 208 is extremely voluntary consensus standards, we are alert symbol in black. difficult to read as it contains multiple required by the Act to provide Congress, (ii) The message area shall be white cross-references and has retained all of with black text. The message area shall 14 the requirements applicable to vehicle Voluntary consensus standards are technical 2 2 standards developed or adopted by voluntary be no less than 30 cm (4.7 in ). of different classes at different times. consensus standards bodies. Technical standards (iii) The pictogram shall be black with Because portions of today’s rule amend are defined by the NTTAA as ‘‘performance-based a red circle and slash on a white existing text, much of that complexity or design-specific technical specifications and background. The pictogram shall be no remains. Additionally, the availability related management systems practices.’’ They pertain to ‘‘products and processes, such as size, less than 30 mm (1.2 in) in diameter. of multiple compliance options, strength, or technical performance of a product, (iv) If the vehicle does not have a back differing injury criteria and a dual process or material.’’ seat, the label shown in Figure 6a or 6b
VerDate 11
may be modified by omitting the accurate description of the vehicle’s air improper placement of child restraint statement: ‘‘The BACK SEAT is the bag system in an easily understandable systems. SAFEST place for children.’’ format. The owner’s manual shall (vii) For vehicles certified to meet the (2) Vehicles certified to meet the include a statement to the effect that the requirements of S19.2, S21.2 or S23.2, a requirements specified in S19, S21, or vehicle is equipped with an air bag and discussion of the telltale light, S23, by means of an automatic lap/shoulder belt at both front outboard specifying its location in the vehicle and suppression system, shall have a label seating positions, and that the air bag is explaining when the light is permanently affixed to either side of the a supplemental restraint at those seating illuminated. sun visor, at the manufacturer’s option, positions. The information shall (viii) Information on how to contact at each front outboard seating position emphasize that all occupants, including the vehicle manufacturer concerning that is equipped with an inflatable the driver, should always wear their seat modifications for persons with restraint. The label shall conform in belts whether or not an air bag is also disabilities that may affect the advanced content to the label shown in Figure 8 provided at their seating position to air bag system. of this standard and shall comply with minimize the risk of severe injury or (g) Additional labels placed elsewhere the requirements of S4.5.1(b)(2)(i) death in the event of a crash. The in the vehicle interior. The language on through S4.5.1(b)(2)(iv). owner’s manual shall also provide any additional air bag warning labels placed (i) The heading area shall be yellow necessary precautions regarding the elsewhere in the vehicle interior shall with the word ‘‘WARNING’’ and the proper positioning of occupants, not cause confusion or contradiction of alert symbol in black. including children, at seating positions any of the statements required in the air (ii) The message area shall be white equipped with air bags to ensure bag sun visor label, and shall be with black text. The message area shall maximum safety protection for those expressed in symbols, words and be no less than 30 cm2 (4.7 in2). occupants. The owner’s manual shall abbreviations required by this standard. (iii) The pictogram shall be black on also explain that no objects should be * * * * * a white background. The pictogram placed over or near the air bag on the S4.11 Test duration for purpose of shall be no less than 30 mm (1.2 in) in instrument panel, because any such measuring injury criteria. length. objects could cause harm if the vehicle (a) For all barrier crashes, the injury (iv) If the vehicle does not have a back is in a crash severe enough to cause the criteria specified in this standard shall seat, the label shown in the figure may air bag to inflate. be met when calculated based on data be modified by omitting the statement: (2) For any vehicle certified to meet recorded for 300 milliseconds after the vehicle strikes the barrier. For low risk ‘‘The BACK SEAT is the SAFEST place the requirements specified in S14.5, deployment tests, the injury criteria for CHILDREN.’’ S15, S17, S19, S21, S23, and S25, the shall be met when calculated based on (3) The vehicle manufacturer may, at manufacturer shall also include in the data recorded for 125 milliseconds after its option, affix an additional label vehicle owner’s manual a discussion of the initiation of the final stage of air bag adjacent to the label shown in Figure 8 the advanced passenger air bag system deployment designed to deploy in a that provides specific information about installed in the vehicle. The discussion barrier crash up to 26 km/h (16 mph). the vehicle’s advanced air bag system as shall explain the proper functioning of long as the information is not confusing the advanced air bag system and shall * * * * * or misleading when read in conjunction provide a summary of the actions that S4.13 Data channels. For vehicles with Figure 8. may affect the proper functioning of the manufactured on or after September 1, (c) Air bag alert label. If the label system. The discussion shall include, at 2001, all data channels used in injury required by S4.5.1(b) is not visible when a minimum, accurate information on the criteria calculations shall be filtered using a phaseless digital filter, such as the sun visor is in the stowed position, following topics: the Butterworth four-pole phaseless an air bag alert label shall be (i) A presentation and explanation of digital filter specified in Appendix C of permanently affixed to that visor so that the main components of the advanced SAE J211/1, rev. Mar 95, incorporated the label is visible when the visor is in passenger air bag system. (ii) An explanation of how the by reference in S4.7. that position. The label shall conform in components function together as part of content to the sun visor label shown in * * * * * the advanced passenger air bag system. figure 6(c) of this standard, and shall S6.6 Neck injury. When measuring (iii) The basic requirements for proper neck injury, each of the following injury comply with the requirements of operation, including an explanation of S4.5.1(c)(1) through S4.5.1(c)(3). criteria shall be met. the actions that may affect the proper (a) Nij. (1) The message area shall be black functioning of the system. (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force with yellow text. The message area shall (iv) For vehicles certified to meet the (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be be no less than 20 square cm. requirements of S19.2, S21.2 or S23.2, a measured by the dummy upper neck (2) The pictogram shall be black with complete description of the passenger load cell for the duration of the crash a red circle and slash on a white air bag suppression system installed in event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, background. The pictogram shall be no the vehicle, including a discussion of axial force, and bending moment shall less than 20 mm in diameter. any suppression zone. be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ (3) If a vehicle does not have an (v) An explanation of the interaction 1 rev. Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class inflatable restraint at any front seating of the advanced passenger air bag 600 (see S4.7). position other than that for the driver, system with other vehicle components, (2) During the event, the axial force the pictogram may be omitted from the such as seat belts, seats or other (Fz) can be either in tension or label shown in figure 6c. components. compression while the occipital condyle * * * * * (vi) A summary of the expected bending moment (Mocy) can be in either (f) Information to appear in owner’s outcomes when child restraint systems, flexion or extension. This results in four manual. children and small teenagers or adults possible loading conditions for Nij: (1) The owner’s manual for any are both properly and improperly tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion vehicle equipped with an inflatable positioned in the passenger seat, (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or restraint system shall include an including cautionary advice against compression-flexion (Ncf).
VerDate 11
(3) When calculating Nij using (c) Vehicles that are manufactured in S15.3.7 Unless otherwise indicated, equation S6.6(a)(4), the critical values, two or more stages or that are altered instrumentation for data acquisition, Fzc and Myc, are: (within the meaning of 49 CFR 567.7) data channel frequency class, and (i) Fzc = 6806 N (1530 lbf) when Fz is after having been previously certified in moment calculations are the same as in tension accordance with Part 567 of this chapter given for the 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart (ii) Fzc = 6160 N (1385 lbf) when Fz is are not subject to the requirements of O Hybrid III 5th percentile female test in compression S14.3. dummy. (iii) Myc = 310 Nm (229 lbf-ft) when a (d) Vehicles that are manufactured by S16. Test procedures for rigid barrier flexion moment exists at the an original vehicle manufacturer that test requirements using 5th percentile occipital condyle produces or assembles fewer than 5,000 adult female dummies. (iv) Myc = 135 Nm (100 lbf-ft) when an vehicles annually for sale in the United S16.1 General provisions. Crash extension moment exists at the States are not subject to the testing to determine compliance with occipital condyle. requirements of S14.3. the requirements of S15 of this standard (4) At each point in time, only one of * * * * * is conducted as specified in the the four loading conditions occurs and S15.3.6 Neck injury. When following paragraphs (a) and (b). the Nij value corresponding to that measuring neck injury, each of the (a) Belted test. Place a 49 CFR Part 572 loading condition is computed and the following injury criteria shall be met. Subpart O 5th percentile adult female three remaining loading modes shall be (a) Nij. test dummy at each front outboard considered a value of zero. The (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force seating position of a vehicle, in expression for calculating each Nij (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be accordance with the procedures loading condition is given by: measured by the dummy upper neck specified in S16.3 of this standard. Nij = (Fz/Fzc) + (Mocy/Myc) load cell for the duration of the crash Impact the vehicle traveling event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, longitudinally forward at any speed, up (5) None of the four Nij values shall axial force, and bending moment shall to and including 48 km/h (30 mph), into exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ a fixed rigid barrier that is (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), 1 rev. Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class perpendicular within a tolerance of ± 5 measured at the upper neck load cell, 600 (see S4.7). degrees to the line of travel of the shall not exceed 4170 N (937 lbf) at any (2) During the event, the axial force vehicle under the applicable conditions time. (Fz) can be either in tension or of S16.2 of this standard. (c) Peak compression. Compression compression while the occipital condyle (b) Unbelted test. Place a 49 CFR Part force (Fz), measured at the upper neck bending moment (Mocy) can be in either 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult load cell, shall not exceed 4000 N (899 flexion or extension. This results in four female test dummy at each front lbf) at any time. possible loading conditions for Nij: outboard seating position of a vehicle, * * * * * Tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion in accordance with the procedures S14.1 Vehicles manufactured on or (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or specified in S16.3 of this standard, after September 1, 2003, and before compression-flexion (Ncf). except S16.3.5. Impact the vehicle September 1, 2006. (3) When calculating Nij using traveling longitudinally forward at any * * * * * equation S15.3.6(a)(4), the critical speed, from 32 km/h (20 mph) to 40 km/ (d) Vehicles that are manufactured by values, Fzc and Myc, are: h (25 mph), inclusive, into a fixed rigid an original vehicle manufacturer that (i) Fzc = 4287 N (964 lbf) when Fz is in barrier that is perpendicular within a produces or assembles fewer than 5,000 tension tolerance of ± 5 degrees to the line of vehicles annually for sale in the United (ii) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is travel of the vehicle under the States are not subject to the in compression applicable conditions of S16.2 of this requirements of S14.1. (iii) Myc = 155 Nm (114 lbf-ft) when a standard. * * * * * flexion moment exists at the S16.2 Test conditions. S14.3 Vehicles manufactured on or occipital condyle S16.2.1 The vehicle, including test after September 1, 2007, and before (iv) Myc = 67 Nm (49 lbf-ft) when an devices and instrumentation, is loaded September 1, 2010. extension moment exists at the as in S8.1.1. (a) For vehicles manufactured for sale occipital condyle. S16.2.2 Movable vehicle windows in the United States on or before (4) At each point in time, only one of and vents are placed in the fully closed September 1, 2007, and before the four loading conditions occurs and position, unless the vehicle September 1, 2010, a percentage of the the Nij value corresponding to that manufacturer chooses to specify a manufacturer’s production, as specified loading condition is computed and the different adjustment position prior to in S14.3.1, shall meet the requirements three remaining loading modes shall be the time the vehicle is certified. specified in S14.5.1(b) (in addition to considered a value of zero. The S16.2.3 Convertibles and open-body the other requirements of this standard). expression for calculating each Nij type vehicles have the top, if any, in (b) Manufacturers that sell two or loading condition is given by: place in the closed passenger fewer carlines, as that term is defined at Nij = (Fz/Fzc) + (Mocy/Myc) compartment configuration. 49 CFR 583.4, in the United States may, (5) None of the four Nij values shall S16.2.4 Doors are fully closed and at the option of the manufacturer, meet exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. latched but not locked. the requirements of this paragraph (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), S16.2.5 The dummy is clothed in instead of paragraph (a) of this section. measured at the upper neck load cell, form fitting cotton stretch garments with Each vehicle manufactured on or after shall not exceed 2620 N (589 lbf) at any short sleeves and above the knee length September 1, 2008, and before time. pants. A size 7 1/2W shoe which meets September 1, 2010, shall meet the (c) Peak compression. Compression the configuration and size specifications requirements specified in S14.5.1(b) (in force (Fz), measured at the upper neck of MIL–S–21711E (see S4.7) or its addition to the other requirements load cell, shall not exceed 2520 N (566 equivalent is placed on each foot of the specified in this standard). lbf) at any time. test dummy.
VerDate 11
S16.2.6 Limb joints are set at one g, seat at the midpoint height with the seat S16.3.2.1 Driver torso/head/seat barely restraining the weight of the limb cushion reference angle set as closely as back angle positioning. when extended horizontally. Leg joints possible to the angle recorded in S16.3.2.1.1 With the seat in the are adjusted with the torso in the supine S16.2.10.3.1. Mark location of the seat position determined in S16.2.10, use position. for future reference. only the controls which move the seat S16.2.7 Instrumentation shall not S16.3 Dummy seating positioning fore and aft to place the seat in the affect the motion of dummies during procedures. The 49 CFR Part 572 rearmost position, without adjusting impact. Subpart O 5th percentile adult female independent height controls. If the seat S16.2.8 The stabilized temperature test dummy is positioned as follows: cushion reference angle automatically of the dummy is at any level between S16.3.1 General provisions and changes as the seat is moved from the 20.6° C and 22.2° C ( 69° F to 72° F). definitions. full forward position, maintain, as S16.2.9 Steering wheel adjustment. S16.3.1.1 All angles are measured closely as possible, the seat cushion S16.2.9.1 Adjust a tiltable steering with respect to the horizontal plane reference angle in S16.2.10.3.1, for the wheel, if possible, so that the steering unless otherwise stated. final forward position when measuring wheel hub is at the geometric center of S16.3.1.2 The dummy’s neck bracket the pelvic angle as specified in its full range of driving positions. is adjusted to align the zero degree S16.3.2.1.11. S16.2.9.2 If there is no setting detent index marks. S16.3.2.1.2. Fully recline the seat at the mid-position, lower the steering S16.3.1.3 The term ‘‘midsagittal back, if adjustable. Install the dummy wheel to the detent just below the mid- plane’’ refers to the vertical plane that into the driver’s seat, such that when position. separates the dummy into equal left and the legs are positioned 120 degrees to S16.2.9.3 If the steering column is right halves. the thighs, the calves of the legs are not telescoping, place the steering column S16.3.1.4 The term ‘‘vertical touching the seat cushion. in the mid-position. If there is no mid- longitudinal plane’’ refers to a vertical S16.3.2.1.3 Bucket seats. Center the position, move the steering wheel plane parallel to the vehicle’s dummy on the seat cushion so that its rearward one position from the mid- longitudinal centerline. midsagittal plane is vertical and position. S16.3.1.5 The term ‘‘vertical plane’’ coincides with the vertical longitudinal S16.2.10 Driver and passenger seat refers to a vertical plane, not necessarily plane through the center of the seat set-up. parallel to the vehicle’s longitudinal cushion. S16.2.10.1 Lumbar support centerline. S16.3.2.1.4 Bench seats. Position the adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar S16.3.1.6 The term ‘‘transverse midsagittal plane of the dummy vertical supports so that the lumbar support is instrumentation platform’’ refers to the and parallel to the vehicle’s longitudinal in its lowest, retracted or deflated transverse instrumentation surface centerline and aligned with the center of adjustment position. inside the dummy’s skull casting to the steering wheel rim. S16.2.10.2 Other seat adjustments. which the neck load cell mounts. This S16.3.2.1.5 Hold the dummy’s Position any adjustable parts of the seat surface is perpendicular to the skull thighs down and push rearward on the that provide additional support so that cap’s machined inferior-superior upper torso to maximize the dummy’s they are in the lowest or most open mounting surface. pelvic angle. adjustment position. S16.3.1.7 The term ‘‘thigh’’ refers to S16.3.2.1.6 Place the legs at 120 S16.2.10.3 Seat position adjustment. the femur between, but not including, degrees to the thighs. Set the initial If the passenger seat does not adjust the knee and the pelvis. transverse distance between the independently of the driver seat, the S16.3.1.8 The term ‘‘leg’’ refers to longitudinal centerlines at the front of driver seat shall control the final the lower part of the entire leg including the dummy’s knees at 160 to 170 mm position of the passenger seat. the knee. (6.3 to 6.7 in), with the thighs and legs S16.2.10.3.1 If the seat is adjustable S16.3.1.9 The term ‘‘foot’’ refers to of the dummy in vertical planes. Push in the fore and aft and/or vertical the foot including the ankle. rearward on the dummy’s knees to force directions, move the seat to the rearmost S16.3.1.10 The longitudinal the pelvis into the seat so there is no gap position at the full down height centerline of a bucket seat cushion is between the pelvis and the seat back or adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts determined at the widest part of the seat until contact occurs between the back of fore and aft, independent of the seat cushion. Measure perpendicular to the the dummy’s calves and the front of the back, set this adjustment to the full longitudinal centerline of the vehicle. seat cushion. rearward position. If the seat cushion S16.3.1.11 For leg and thigh angles S16.3.2.1.7 Gently rock the upper contains a height adjustment, use the following references: torso relative to the lower torso laterally independent of the seat back, set this S16.3.1.11.1 Thigh—a straight line in a side to side motion three times adjustment to the full down position. on the thigh skin between the center of through a ±5 degree arc (approximately Record a seat cushion reference angle. the 1⁄2–13 UNC–2B tapped hole in the 51 mm (2 in) side to side) to reduce S16.2.10.3.2 Using only controls upper leg femur clamp (see drawings friction between the dummy and the which move the seat fore and aft, move 880105–504 (left thigh) and 880105–505 seat. the seat to the full forward position. If (right thigh), upper leg femur clamp) S16.3.2.1.8 If needed, extend the seat adjustments other than fore-aft are and the knee pivot shoulder bolt (part legs slightly so that the feet are not in present and the seat cushion reference 880105–527 in drawing 880105–528R & contact with the floor pan. Let the angle changes from that measured in 528L, sliding knee assy. w/o pot). thighs rest on the seat cushion to the S16.2.10.3.1, use those adjustments to S16.3.1.11.2 Leg—a straight line on extent permitted by the foot movement. maintain as closely as possible the angle the leg skin between the center of the Keeping the leg and the thigh in a recorded in S16.2.10.3.1. ankle shell (parts 880105–609 & 633 in vertical plane, place the foot in the S16.2.10.3.3 If the seat height is drawing 880105–660, ankle assembly) vertical longitudinal plane that passes adjustable, determine the maximum and and the knee pivot shoulder bolt (part through the centerline of the accelerator minimum heights at this position, while 880105–527 in drawing 880105–528R & pedal. Rotate the left thigh outboard maintaining, as closely as possible, the 528L, sliding knee assy. w/o pot). about the hip until the center of the angle recorded in S16.2.10.3.1. Set the S16.3.2 Driver dummy positioning. knee is the same distance from the
VerDate 11
midsagittal plane of the dummy as the assuring that there is a maximum of 5 heel resting on the floor pan as close as right knee ±5 mm (±0.2 in). Using only mm (0.2 in) distance between the possible to the point of intersection of controls which move the seat fore and steering wheel as adjusted in S16.2.9 the planes described by the toe-board aft, attempt to return the seat to the full and the point of contact on the dummy. and floor pan, and not on the wheel- forward position. If either of the S16.3.2.1.10 If it is not possible to well projection or foot rest. dummy’s legs first contacts the steering achieve the head level within ±0.5 S16.3.2.2.4 If the left foot cannot be wheel, then adjust the steering wheel, if degrees, minimize the angle. positioned on the toe board, place the adjustable, upward until contact with S16.3.2.1.11 Measure and set the foot perpendicular to the lower leg the steering wheel is avoided. If the dummy’s pelvic angle using the pelvic centerline as far forward as possible steering wheel is not adjustable, angle gage (drawing TE–2504, with the heel resting on the floor pan. separate the knees enough to avoid incorporated by reference in 49 CFR S16.3.2.2.5 If necessary to avoid steering wheel contact. Proceed with Part 572, Subpart O, of this chapter). contact with the vehicle’s brake or moving the seat forward until either the The angle shall be set to 20.0 degrees clutch pedal, rotate the test dummy’s ± leg contacts the vehicle interior or the 2.5 degrees. If this is not possible, left foot about the lower leg. If there is seat reaches the full forward position. adjust the pelvic angle as close to 20.0 still pedal interference, rotate the left leg (The right foot may contact and depress degrees as possible while keeping the outboard about the hip the minimum the accelerator and/or change the angle transverse instrumentation platform of distance necessary to avoid the pedal of the foot with respect to the leg during the head as level as possible by interference. If the left foot does not seat movement.) If necessary to avoid adjustments specified in S16.3.2.1.9 and contact the floor pan, place the foot contact with the vehicles brake or clutch S16.3.2.1.10. parallel to the floor and place the leg as pedal, rotate the test dummy’s left foot S16.3.2.1.12 If the dummy is perpendicular to the thigh as possible. about the leg. If there is still contacting the vehicle interior after S16.3.2.3 Driver arm/hand interference, rotate the left thigh these adjustments, move the seat positioning. outboard about the hip the minimum rearward until there is a maximum of 5 S16.3.2.3.1 Place the dummy’s mm (0.2 in) between the contact point distance necessary to avoid pedal upper arms adjacent to the torso with of the dummy and the interior of the interference. If a dummy leg contacts the arm centerlines as close to a vertical vehicle or if it has a manual seat the vehicle interior before the full longitudinal plane as possible. adjustment, to the next rearward detent forward position is attained, position S16.3.2.3.2 Place the palms of the position. If after these adjustments, the the seat at the next detent where there dummy in contact with the outer part of dummy contact point is more than 5 is no contact. If the seat is a power seat, the steering wheel rim at its horizontal mm (0.2 in) from the vehicle interior move the seat fore and aft to avoid centerline with the thumbs over the and the seat is still not in its contact while assuring that there is a steering wheel rim. forwardmost position, move the seat S16.3.2.3.3 If it is not possible to maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) distance forward until the contact point is 5 mm position the thumbs inside the steering between the vehicle interior and the (0.2 in) or less from the vehicle interior, wheel rim at its horizontal centerline, point on the dummy that would first or if it has a manual seat adjustment, then position them above and as close contact the vehicle interior. If the move the seat to the closest detent to the horizontal centerline of the steering wheel was moved, return it to position without making contact, or steering wheel rim as possible. the position described in S16.2.9. If the until the seat reaches its forwardmost S16.3.2.3.4 Lightly tape the hands to steering wheel contacts the dummy’s position, whichever occurs first. the steering wheel rim so that if the leg(s) prior to attaining this position, S16.3.2.2 Driver foot positioning. hand of the test dummy is pushed adjust it to the next higher detent, or if S16.3.2.2.1 If the vehicle has an upward by a force of not less than 9 N infinitely adjustable, until there is 5 mm adjustable accelerator pedal, adjust it to (2 lb) and not more than 22 N (5 lb), the (0.2 in) clearance between the wheel the full forward position. Rest the right tape releases the hand from the steering and the dummy’s leg(s). foot of the test dummy on the wheel rim. S16.3.2.1.9 For vehicles without undepressed accelerator pedal with the S16.3.3 Passenger dummy adjustable seat backs, adjust the lower rearmost point of the heel on the floor positioning. neck bracket to level the head as much pan in the plane of the pedal. If the foot S16.3.3.1 Passenger torso/head/seat as possible. For vehicles with adjustable cannot be placed on the accelerator back angle positioning. seat backs, while holding the thighs in pedal, set it initially perpendicular to S16.3.3.1.1 With the seat in the place, rotate the seat back forward until the leg and then place it as far forward position determined in S16.2.10, use the transverse instrumentation platform as possible in the direction of the pedal only the controls which move the seat of the head is level to within ±0.5 centerline with the rearmost point of the fore and aft to place the seat in the degree, making sure that the pelvis does heel resting on the floor pan. If the rearmost position, without adjusting not interfere with the seat bight. Inspect vehicle has an adjustable accelerator independent height controls. If the seat the abdomen to ensure that it is pedal and the right foot is not touching cushion reference angle automatically properly installed. If the torso contacts the accelerator pedal when positioned changes as the seat is moved from the the steering wheel, adjust the steering as above, move the pedal rearward until full forward position, maintain as wheel in the following order until there it touches the right foot. If the closely as possible the seat cushion is no contact: telescoping adjustment, accelerator pedal in the full rearward reference angle in S16.2.10.3.1, for the lowering adjustment, raising position still does not touch the foot, final forward position when measuring adjustment. If the vehicle has no leave the pedal in that position. the pelvic angle as specified in adjustments or contact with the steering S16.3.2.2.2 If the ball of the foot S16.3.3.1.11. wheel cannot be eliminated by does not contact the pedal, change the S16.3.3.1.2 Fully recline the seat adjustment, position the seat at the next angle of the foot relative to the leg such back, if adjustable. Install the dummy detent where there is no contact with that the toe of the foot contacts the into the passenger’s seat, such that the steering wheel as adjusted in undepressed accelerator pedal. when the legs are 120 degrees to the S16.2.9. If the seat is a power seat, S16.3.2.2.3 Place the left foot on the thighs, the calves of the legs are not position the seat to avoid contact while toe-board with the rearmost point of the touching the seat cushion.
VerDate 11
S16.3.3.1.3 Bucket seats. Center the S16.3.3.1.10 If it is not possible to center of gravity (CG) of the dummy dummy on the seat cushion so that its orient the head level within ± 0.5 head. midsagittal plane is vertical and degrees, minimize the angle. S16.3.4.3 If the above position is not coincides with the vertical longitudinal S16.3.3.1.11 Measure and set the attainable, move the vertical center of plane through the center of the seat dummy’s pelvic angle using the pelvic the head restraint to the closest detent cushion. angle gage (drawing TE–2504, below the center of the head CG. S16.3.3.1.4 Bench seats. Position the incorporated by reference in 49 CFR S16.3.4.4 If the head restraint has a midsagittal plane of the dummy vertical Part 572, Subpart O, of this chapter). fore and aft adjustment, place the and parallel to the vehicle’s longitudinal The angle shall be set to 20.0 degrees restraint in the forwardmost position or centerline and the same distance from ± 2.5 degrees. If this is not possible, until contact with the head is made, the vehicle’s longitudinal centerline as adjust the pelvic angle as close to 20.0 whichever occurs first. the midsagittal plane of the driver degrees as possible while keeping the S16.3.5 Driver and passenger dummy. transverse instrumentation platform of manual belt adjustment (for tests S16.3.3.1.5 Hold the dummy’s the head as level as possible as specified conducted with a belted dummy) thighs down and push rearward on the in S16.3.3.1.9 and S16.3.3.1.10. S16.3.5.1 If an adjustable seat belt D- ring anchorage exists, place it in the upper torso to maximize the dummy’s S16.3.3.1.12 If the dummy is manufacturer’s design position for a 5th pelvic angle. contacting the vehicle interior after percentile adult female with the seat in S16.3.3.1.6 Place the legs at 120 these adjustments, move the seat the position specified in S16.2.10.3. degrees to the thighs. Set the initial rearward until there is a maximum of 5 transverse distance between the S16.3.5.2 Place the Type 2 manual mm (0.2 in) between the contact point belt around the test dummy and fasten longitudinal centerlines at the front of of the dummy and the interior of the the dummy’s knees at 160 to 170 mm the latch. vehicle or if it has a manual seat (6.3 to 6.7 in), with the thighs and legs S16.3.5.3 Ensure that the dummy’s adjustment, to the next rearward detent of the dummy in vertical planes. Push head remains as level as possible, as position. If after these adjustments the rearward on the dummy’s knees to force specified in S16.3.2.1.9 and S16.3.2.1.10 dummy contact point is more than 5 the pelvis into the seat so there is no gap and S16.3.3.1.9 and S16.3.3.1.10. mm (0.2 in) from the vehicle interior between the pelvis and the seat back or S16.3.5.4 Remove all slack from the and the seat is still not in its forward until contact occurs between the back of lap belt. Pull the upper torso webbing most position, move the seat forward the dummy’s calves and the front of the out of the retractor and allow it to until the contact point is 5 mm (0.2 in) seat cushion. retract; repeat this operation four times. S16.3.3.1.7 Gently rock the upper or less from the vehicle interior, or if it Apply a 9 N (2 lbf) to 18 N (4 lbf) torso relative to the lower torso laterally has a manual seat adjustment, move the tension load to the lap belt. If the belt side to side three times through a ± 5 seat to the closest detent position system is equipped with a tension- degree arc (approximately 51 mm (2 in) without making contact, or until the seat relieving device, introduce the side to side). reaches its forward most position, maximum amount of slack into the S16.3.3.1.8 If needed, extend the whichever occurs first. upper torso belt that is recommended by legs slightly so that the feet are not in S16.3.3.2 Passenger foot positioning. the manufacturer. If the belt system is contact with the floor pan. Let the S16.3.3.2.1 Place the passenger’s feet not equipped with a tension-relieving thighs rest on the seat cushion to the flat on the toe board. device, allow the excess webbing in the extent permitted by the foot movement. S16.3.3.2.2 If the feet cannot be shoulder belt to be retracted by the With the feet perpendicular to the legs, placed flat on the toe board, set them retractive force of the retractor. place the heels on the floor pan. If a heel perpendicular to the leg center lines and * * * * * will not contact the floor pan, place it place them as far forward as possible S18 Test procedure for offset frontal as close to the floor pan as possible. with the heels resting on the floor pan. deformable barrier requirements using Using only controls which move the S16.3.3.3 Passenger arm/hand 5th percentile adult female dummies. seat fore and aft, attempt to return the positioning. S18.1 General provisions. Place a 49 seat to the full forward position. If a S16.3.3.3.1 Place the dummy’s CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile dummy leg contacts the vehicle interior upper arms in contact with the seat back adult female test dummy at each front before the full forward position is and the torso. outboard seating position of a vehicle, attained, position the seat at the next S16.3.3.3.2 Place the palms of the in accordance with the procedures detent where there is no contact. If the dummy in contact with the outside of specified in S16.3 of this standard. seats are power seats, position the seat the thighs. Impact the vehicle traveling to avoid contact while assuring that S16.3.3.3.3 Place the little fingers in longitudinally forward at any speed, up there is a maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) contact with the seat cushion. to and including 40 km/h (25 mph), into distance between the vehicle interior S16.3.4 Driver and passenger a fixed offset deformable barrier under and the point on the dummy that would adjustable head restraints. the conditions and procedures specified first contact the vehicle interior. S16.3.4.1. If the head restraint has in S18.2 of this standard, impacting S16.3.3.1.9 For vehicles without an automatic adjustment, leave it where only the left side of the vehicle. adjustable seat backs, adjust the lower the system positions the restraint after * * * * * neck bracket to level the head as much the dummy is placed in the seat. S19 Requirements to provide as possible. For vehicles with adjustable S16.3.4.2 Adjust each head restraint protection for infants in rear facing and seat backs, while holding the thighs in to its lowest position. convertible child restraints and car place, rotate the seat back forward until S16.3.4.3 Measure the vertical beds. the transverse instrumentation platform distance from the top most point of the S19.1 Each vehicle certified as of the head is level to within ± 0.5 head restraint to the bottom most point. complying with S14 shall, at the option degrees, making sure that the pelvis Locate a horizontal plane through the of the manufacturer, meet the does not interfere with the seat bight. midpoint of this distance. Adjust each requirements specified in S19.2 or Inspect the abdomen to insure that it is head restraint vertically so that this S19.3, under the test procedures properly installed. horizontal plane is aligned with the specified in S20.
VerDate 11
S19.2 Option 1—Automatic identifications may not be adjustable compression while the occipital condyle suppression feature. Each vehicle shall under any driving conditions to a level bending moment (Mocy) can be in either meet the requirements specified in that they become invisible or not flexion or extension. This results in four S19.2.1 through S19.2.3. recognizable to the driver and right front possible loading conditions for Nij: S19.2.1 The vehicle shall be passenger. tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion equipped with an automatic (h) The telltale must not emit light (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or suppression feature for the passenger air except when the passenger air bag is compression-flexion (Ncf). bag which results in deactivation of the urned off or during a bulb check upon (3) When calculating Nij using air bag during each of the static tests vehicle starting. equation S19.4.4(a)(4), the critical specified in S20.2 (using the 49 CFR S19.2.3 The vehicle shall be values, Fzc and Myc, are: equipped with a mechanism that Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI (i) Fzc = 1460 N (328 lbf) when Fz is in indicates whether the air bag system is child dummy in any of the child tension restraints identified in sections B and C suppressed, regardless of whether the passenger seat is occupied. The (ii) Fzc = 1460 N (328 lbf) when Fz is of appendix A of this standard and the in compression 49 CFR part 572 subpart K Newborn mechanism need not be located in the (iii) Myc = 43 Nm (32 lbf-ft) when a Infant dummy in any of the car beds occupant compartment unless it is the flexion moment exists at the identified in section A of appendix A, telltale described in S19.2.2. occipital condyle as appropriate), and activation of the air S19.3 Option 2—Low risk (iv) Myc = 17 Nm (13 lbf-ft) when an bag system during each of the static tests deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the extension moment exists at the specified in S20.3 (using the 49 CFR injury criteria specified in S19.4 of this occipital condyle. Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult standard when the passenger air bag is female dummy). deployed in accordance with the (4) At each point in time, only one of S19.2.2 The vehicle shall be procedures specified in S20.4. the four loading conditions occurs and equipped with at least one telltale S19.4 Injury criteria for the 49 CFR the Nij value corresponding to that which emits light whenever the Part 572, Subpart R 12-month-old loading condition is computed and the passenger air bag system is deactivated CRABI test dummy. three remaining loading modes shall be and does not emit light whenever the S19.4.1 All portions of the test considered a value of zero. The passenger air bag system is activated, dummy and child restraint shall be expression for calculating each Nij except that the telltale(s) need not contained within the outer surfaces of loading condition is given by: the vehicle passenger compartment. illuminate when the passenger seat is Nij ’ (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc) S19.4.2 Head injury criteria. unoccupied. Each telltale: (a) For any two points in time, t1 and (5) None of the four Nij values shall (a) Shall emit yellow light; exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. (b) Shall have the identifying words t2, during the event which are separated (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), ‘‘PASSENGER AIR BAG OFF’’ or ‘‘PASS by not more than a 15 millisecond time measured at the upper neck load cell, AIR BAG OFF’’ on the telltale or within interval and where t1 is less than t2, the shall not exceed 780 N (175 lbf) at any 25 mm (1.0 in) of the telltale; and head injury criterion (HIC15) shall be time. (c) Shall not be combined with the determined using the resultant head readiness indicator required by S4.5.2 of acceleration at the center of gravity of (c) Peak compression. Compression this standard. the dummy head, ar, expressed as a force (Fz), measured at the upper neck (d) Shall be located within the interior multiple of g (the acceleration of load cell, shall not exceed 960 N (216 of the vehicle and forward of and above gravity) and shall be calculated using lbf) at any time. the design H-point of both the driver’s the expression: S19.4.5 Unless otherwise indicated, and the right front passenger’s seat in instrumentation for data acquisition, 25. data channel frequency class, and their forwardmost seating positions and 1 t2 shall not be located on or adjacent to a ∫ adt () tt moment calculations are the same as ()t r 21 surface that can be used for temporary tt21 1 given for the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI test dummy. or permanent storage where use of the (b) The maximum calculated HIC 15 S20 Test procedure for S19. storage space could obscure the telltale value shall not exceed 390. from either the driver’s or right front S19.4.3 The resultant acceleration S20.1 General provisions. passenger’s view, or where the telltale calculated from the output of the S20.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a would be obscured from the driver’s thoracic instrumentation shall not car bed, a rear facing child restraint, or view if a rear facing child restraint is exceed 50 g’s, except for intervals whose a convertible child restraint may be installed in the right front passenger’s cumulative duration is not more than 3 conducted using any such restraint seat. milliseconds. listed in sections A, B, and C of (e) Shall be visible and recognizable S19.4.4 Neck injury. When Appendix A of this standard to a driver and right front passenger measuring neck injury, each of the respectively. The car bed, rear facing during night and day when the following injury criteria shall be met. child restraint, or convertible child occupants have adapted to the ambient (a) Nij. restraint may be unused or have been light roadway conditions. (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force previously used only for automatic (f) Telltales need not be visible or (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be suppression tests. If it has been used, recognizable when not activated. measured by the dummy upper neck there shall not be any visible damage (g) Means shall be provided for load cell for the duration of the crash prior to the test. making telltales and their identification event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, S20.1.2 Each vehicle certified to this visible and recognizable to the driver axial force, and bending moment shall option shall comply in tests conducted and right front passenger under all be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ with the right front outboard seating driving conditions. The means for 1 rev. Mar95 Channel Frequency Class position, if adjustable fore and aft, at providing the required visibility may be 600 (see S4.7). full rearward, middle, and full forward adjustable manually or automatically, (2) During the event, the axial force positions. If the child restraint or except that the telltales and their (Fz) can be either in tension or dummy contacts the vehicle interior,
VerDate 11
move the seat rearward to the next S20.1.9.2 Other seat adjustments. specified in FMVSS No. 225, attach the detent that provides clearance. If the Position any adjustable parts of the seat child restraint to the vehicle seat seat is a power seat, move the seat that provide additional support so that anchorage instead of aligning the rearward while assuring that there is a they are in the lowest or most open planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance. adjustment position. belt. S20.1.3 If the car bed, rear facing S20.1.9.3 If the seat cushion adjusts (b) While maintaining the child child restraint, or convertible child fore and aft, independent of the seat restraint positions achieved in restraint is equipped with a handle, the back, set this adjustment to the full S20.2.1.4(a), secure the child restraint vehicle shall comply in tests conducted rearward position. by following, to the extent possible, the with the handle at both the child S20.1.9.4 If the seat height is child restraint manufacturer’s directions restraint manufacturer’s recommended adjustable, determine the maximum and regarding proper installation of the position for use in vehicles and in the minimum heights at the full rearward, restraint in the rear facing mode. upright position. middle, and full forward positions. Set (c) Place any adjustable seat belt S20.1.4 If the car bed, rear facing the seat at the mid-point height for each anchorages at the vehicle child restraint, or convertible child of the three fore-aft test positions. manufacturer’s nominal design position restraint is equipped with a sunshield, S20.1.9.5 The seat back angle, if for a 50th percentile adult male the vehicle shall comply in tests adjustable, is set at the manufacturer’s occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any conducted with the sunshield both fully nominal design seat back angle for a tension from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to open and fully closed. 50th percentile adult male as specified secure the child restraint. Measure belt S20.1.5 The vehicle shall comply in in S8.1.3. tension in a flat, straight section of the tests with the car bed, rear facing child S20.1.9.6 If adjustable, set the head lap belt between the child restraint belt restraint, or convertible child restraint restraint at the full down and full path and the contact point with the belt uncovered and in tests with a towel or forward position. anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away blanket weighing up to 1.0 kg (2.2 lb) S20.1.10 The longitudinal centerline from the buckle (to avoid interference placed on or over the restraint in any of of a bucket seat cushion is determined from the shoulder portion of the belt). the following positions: at the widest part of the seat cushion. (d) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 (a) with the blanket covering the top Measure perpendicular to the Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy and sides of the restraint, and longitudinal centerline of the vehicle. in the child restraint by following, to the (b) with the blanket placed from the S20.2 Static tests of automatic extent possible, the manufacturer’s top of the vehicle’s seat back to the suppression feature which shall result instructions provided with the child forwardmost edge of the restraint. in deactivation of the passenger air bag. restraint for seating infants. S20.1.6 Except as otherwise Each vehicle that is certified as (e) Start the vehicle engine or place specified, if the car bed, rear facing complying with S19.2 shall meet the the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, child restraint, or convertible child following test requirements. whichever will turn on the suppression restraint has an anchorage system as S20.2.1 Belted rear facing and system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait specified in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 and convertible child restraints. 10 seconds, then check whether the air is tested in a vehicle with a right front S20.2.1.1 The vehicle shall comply bag is deactivated. outboard vehicle seat that has an in tests using any child restraint S20.2.1.5 Facing forward anchorage system as specified in specified in section B and section C of (convertible restraints only). FMVSS No. 225, the vehicle shall Appendix A of this standard. (a) The vehicle shall comply in both comply with the belted test conditions S20.2.1.2 Locate a vertical plane of the following positions, if applicable: with the restraint anchorage system through the longitudinal centerline of (1) Without attaching the child attached to the vehicle seat anchorage the child restraint. This will be referred restraint anchorage system as specified system and the vehicle seat belt to as ‘‘Plane’’. in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle unattached. It shall also comply with S20.2.1.3 For bucket seats, ‘‘Plane seat anchorage system specified in the belted test conditions with the B’’ refers to a vertical plane parallel to FMVSS No. 225, align the child restraint restraint anchorage system unattached the vehicle longitudinal centerline system facing forward such that Plane A to the vehicle seat anchorage system and through the longitudinal centerline of is aligned with Plane B. the vehicle seat belt attached. The the right front outboard vehicle seat (2) If the child restraint is certified to vehicle shall comply with the unbelted cushion. For bench seats, ‘‘Plane B’’ S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, and the vehicle test conditions with the restraint refers to a vertical plane through the seat has an anchorage system as anchorage system unattached to the right front outboard vehicle seat parallel specified in FMVSS No. 225, attach the vehicle seat anchorage system. to the vehicle longitudinal centerline child restraint to the vehicle seat S20.1.7 If the car bed, rear facing the same distance from the longitudinal anchorage instead of aligning the child restraint, or convertible child centerline of the vehicle as the center of planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety restraint comes equipped with a the steering wheel. belt. detachable base, the vehicle shall S20.2.1.4 Facing rear. (b) While maintaining the child comply in tests conducted with the (a) The vehicle shall comply in both restraint positions achieved in detachable base attached to the child of the following positions, if applicable: S20.2.1.5(a), secure the child restraint restraint and with the detachable base (1) Without attaching the child by following, to the extent possible, the unattached to the child restraint. restraint anchorage system as specified child restraint manufacturer’s directions S20.1.8 Do not attach any tethers. in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle regarding proper installation of the S20.1.9 Seat set-up. Unless seat anchorage system specified in restraint in the forward facing mode. otherwise stated, FMVSS No. 225, align the child restraint (c) Place any adjustable seat belt S20.1.9.1 Lumbar support system facing rearward such that Plane anchorages at the vehicle adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar A is aligned with Plane B. manufacturer’s nominal design position supports so that the lumbar support is (2) If the child restraint is certified to for a 50th percentile adult male in its lowest, retracted or deflated S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, and the vehicle occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any adjustment position. seat has an anchorage system as tension from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to
VerDate 11
secure the child restraint. Measure belt (c) Start the vehicle engine or place adjustable) to the nominal design tension in a flat, straight section of the the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, position for a 50th percentile adult male lap belt between the child restraint belt whichever will turn on the suppression as specified in S8.1.3. Position path and the contact point with the belt system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait adjustable lumbar supports so that the anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away 10 seconds, then check whether the air lumbar support is in its lowest, retracted from the buckle (to avoid interference bag is deactivated. or deflated adjustment position. from the shoulder portion of the belt). S20.2.3 Tests with a belted car bed. Position any adjustable parts of the seat (d) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 S20.2.3.1 The vehicle shall comply that provide additional support so that Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy in tests using any car bed specified in they are in the lowest or most open in the child restraint by following, to the section A of Appendix A of this adjustment position. If the seat cushion extent possible, the manufacturer’s standard. adjusts fore and aft, independent of the instructions provided with the child S20.2.3.2 (a) Install the car bed by seat back, set this adjustment to the full restraint for seating infants. following, to the extent possible, the car rearward position. If adjustable, set the (e) Start the vehicle engine or place bed manufacturer’s directions regarding head restraint at the full down position. the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, proper installation of the car bed. If the child restraint or dummy contacts whichever will turn on the suppression (b) Place any adjustable seat belt the vehicle interior, move the seat system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait anchorages at the vehicle rearward to the next detent that 10 seconds, then check whether the air manufacturer’s nominal design position provides clearance. If the seat is a power bag is deactivated. for a 50th percentile adult male seat, move the seat rearward while S20.2.2 Unbelted rear facing and occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to assuring that there is a maximum of 5 convertible child restraints. secure the car bed. mm (0.2 in) clearance. S20.2.2.1 The vehicle shall comply (c) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 S20.4.2 The vehicle shall comply in in tests using any child restraint Subpart K Newborn Infant dummy in tests using any child restraint specified specified in section B and section C of the car bed by following, to the extent in section B and section C of appendix appendix A of this standard. possible, the car bed manufacturer’s A to this standard. S20.2.2.2 Locate a vertical plane instructions provided with the car bed S20.4.3 Locate a vertical plane through the longitudinal centerline of for positioning infants. through the longitudinal centerline of the child restraint. This will be referred (d) Start the vehicle engine or place the child restraint. This will be referred to as ‘‘Plane A’’. the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, to as ‘‘Plane A’’. S20.2.2.3 For bucket seats, ‘‘Plane whichever will turn on the suppression S20.4.4 For bucket seats, ‘‘Plane B’’ B’’ refers to a vertical plane parallel to system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait refers to a vertical plane parallel to the the vehicle longitudinal centerline 10 seconds, then check whether the air vehicle longitudinal centerline through through the longitudinal centerline of bag is deactivated. the geometric center of the right front the right front outboard vehicle seat S20.3 Static tests of automatic outboard seat cushion. For bench seats, cushion. For bench seats, ‘‘Plane B’’ suppression feature which shall result ‘‘Plane B’’ refers to a vertical plane refers to a vertical plane through the in activation of the passenger air bag through the right front outboard seat right front outboard seat parallel to the system. parallel to the vehicle longitudinal vehicle longitudinal centerline the same S20.3.1 Each vehicle certified to this centerline that is the same distance from distance from the longitudinal option shall comply in tests conducted the longitudinal centerline of the centerline of the vehicle as the center of with the right front outboard seating vehicle as the center of the steering the steering wheel. position, if adjustable fore and aft, at the wheel. S20.2.2.4 Facing rear. full rearward, middle, and, subject to S20.4.5 Align the child restraint (a) Align the child restraint system S16.3.3.1.8, full forward positions. All system facing rearward such that Plane facing rearward such that Plane A is tests are conducted with the seat height, A is aligned with Plane B. aligned with Plane B and the child if adjustable, in the mid-height position. S20.4.6 If the child restraint is restraint is in contact with the seat back. S20.3.2 Place a 49 CFR Part 572 certified to S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, and (b) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th percentile adult female the vehicle seat has an anchorage Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy test dummy at the right front outboard system as specified in FMVSS No. 225, in the child restraint by following, to the seating position of the vehicle, in attach the child restraint to the vehicle extent possible, the manufacturer’s accordance with procedures specified in seat anchorage instead of aligning the instructions provided with the child S16.3.3 of this standard, except as planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety restraint for seating infants. specified in S20.3.1, subject to the fore- belt. (c) Start the vehicle engine or place aft seat positions in S20.3.1. Do not S20.4.7 While maintaining the child the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, fasten the seat belt. restraint position achieved in S20.4.5, whichever will turn on the suppression S20.3.3 Start the vehicle engine or secure the child restraint by following, system, and close all vehicle doors. Wait place the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, to the extent possible, the child restraint 10 seconds, then check whether the air whichever will turn on the suppression manufacturer’s directions regarding bag is deactivated. system, and then close all vehicle doors. proper installation of the restraint in the S20.2.2.5 Facing forward. S20.3.4 Wait 10 seconds, then check rear facing mode. Place any adjustable (a) Align the child restraint system whether the air bag system is activated. seat belt anchorages at the facing forward such that Plane A is S20.4 Low risk deployment test. manufacturer’s nominal design position aligned with Plane B and the child Each vehicle that is certified as for a 50th percentile adult male restraint is in contact with the seat back. complying with S19.3 shall meet the occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any (b) Position the 49 CFR Part 572 following test requirements. tension from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy S20.4.1 Position the right front secure the child restraint. Measure belt in the child restraint by following, to the outboard vehicle seat in the full forward tension in a flat, straight section of the extent possible, the manufacturer’s seat track position, adjust the seat height lap belt between the child restraint belt instructions provided with the child (if adjustable) to the mid-height path and the contact point with the belt restraint for seating infants. position, and adjust the seat back (if anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away
VerDate 11
from the buckle (to avoid interference S21.4 Option 3—Low risk (ii) Fzc = 2120 N (477 lbf) when Fz is from the shoulder portion of the belt). deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the in compression S20.4.8 Position the 49 CFR Part 572 injury criteria specified in S21.5 of this (iii) Myc = 68 Nm (50 lbf-ft) when a Subpart R 12-month-old CRABI dummy standard when the passenger air bag is flexion moment exists at the in the child restraint by following, to the deployed in accordance with both of the occipital condyle extent possible, the manufacturer’s low risk deployment test procedures (iv) Myc = 27 Nm (20 lbf-ft) when an instructions provided with the child specified in S22.4. extension moment exists at the restraint for seating infants. S21.5 Injury criteria for the 49 CFR occipital condyle. S20.4.9 Deploy the right front Part 572, Subpart P 3-year-old child test (4) At each point in time, only one of outboard frontal air bag system. If the air dummy. the four loading conditions occurs and bag system contains a multistage S21.5.1 All portions of the test the Nij value corresponding to that inflator, the vehicle shall be able to dummy shall be contained within the loading condition is computed and the comply at any stage or combination of outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger three remaining loading modes shall be stages or time delay between successive compartment. considered a value of zero. The S21.5.2 Head injury criteria. stages that could occur in the presence expression for calculating each Nij (a) For any two points in time, t and of an infant in a rear facing child 1 loading condition is given by: t , during the event which are separated restraint and a 49 CFR Part 572, Subpart 2 by not more than a 15 millisecond time Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc) R 12-month-old CRABI dummy interval and where t is less than t , the (5) None of the four Nij values shall positioned according to S20.4 in a rigid 1 2 head injury criterion (HIC ) shall be exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. barrier crash test at speeds up to 64 km/ 15 determined using the resultant head (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), h (40 mph). acceleration at the center of gravity of measured at the upper neck load cell, S21 Requirements using 3-year-old the dummy head, ar, expressed as a shall not exceed 1130 N (254 lbf) at any child dummies. multiple of g (the acceleration of time. S21.1 Each vehicle that is certified gravity) and shall be calculated using (c) Peak compression. Compression as complying with S14 shall, at the the expression: force (Fz), measured at the upper neck option of the manufacturer, meet the load cell, shall not exceed 1380 N (310 requirements specified in S21.2, S21.3, 25. lbf) at any time. 1 t2 S21.4 or S21.5, under the test ∫ adt () tt S21.5.6 Unless otherwise indicated, procedures specified in S22 or S28, as t r 21 ()tt21 1 instrumentation for data acquisition, applicable. data channel frequency class, and (b) The maximum calculated HIC S21.2 Option 1—Automatic 15 moment calculations are the same as value shall not exceed 570. suppression feature. Each vehicle shall given in 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3- meet the requirements specified in S21.5.3 The resultant acceleration calculated from the output of the year-old child test dummy. S21.2.1 through S21.2.3. S22 Test procedure for S21. thoracic instrumentation shall not S21.2.1 The vehicle shall be S22.1 General provisions and exceed 55 g’s, except for intervals whose equipped with an automatic definitions. cumulative duration is not more than 3 suppression feature for the passenger air S22.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a bag which results in deactivation of the milliseconds. S21.5.4 Compression deflection of forward facing child restraint, including air bag during each of the static tests the sternum relative to the spine, as a booster seat where applicable, may be specified in S22.2 (using a 49 CFR Part determined by instrumentation, shall conducted using any such restraint 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy not exceed 34 millimeters (1.3 in). listed in section C and section D of and, as applicable, any child restraint S21.5.5 Neck injury. When Appendix A of this standard, specified in section C and section D of measuring neck injury, each of the respectively. The child restraint may be appendix A to this standard), and following injury criteria shall be met. unused or have been previously used activation of the air bag system during (a) Nij. only for automatic suppression tests. If each of the static tests specified in S22.3 (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force it has been used, there shall not be any (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be visible damage prior to the test. Booster percentile adult female dummy). measured by the dummy upper neck seats are to be used in the manner S21.2.2 The vehicle shall be load cell for the duration of the crash appropriate for a 3-year-old child of the equipped with a telltale light meeting event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, same height and weight as the 3-year- the requirements specified in S19.2.2. axial force, and bending moment shall old child dummy. S21.2.3 The vehicle shall be be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ S22.1.2 Unless otherwise specified, equipped with a mechanism that 1 rev. Mar95 Channel Frequency Class each vehicle certified to this option indicates whether the air bag is 600 (see S4.7). shall comply in tests conducted with suppressed, regardless of whether the (2) During the event, the axial force the right front outboard seating position passenger seat is occupied. The (Fz) can be either in tension or at the full rearward, middle, and the full mechanism need not be located in the compression while the occipital condyle forward positions. If the dummy occupant compartment unless it is the bending moment (Mocy) can be in either contacts the vehicle interior, move the telltale described in S21.2.2. flexion or extension. This results in four seat rearward to the next detent that S21.3 Option 2—Dynamic automatic possible loading conditions for Nij: provides clearance. If the seat is a power suppression system that suppresses the Tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion seat, move the seat rearward while air bag when an occupant is out of (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or assuring that there is a maximum of 5 position. (This option is available under compression-flexion (Ncf). mm (0.2 in) clearance. the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The (3) When calculating Nij using S22.1.3 Except as otherwise vehicle shall be equipped with a equation S21.5.5(a)(4), the critical specified, if the child restraint has an dynamic automatic suppression system values, Fzc and Myc, are: anchorage system as specified in S5.9 of for the passenger air bag system which (i) Fzc = 2120 N (477 lbf) when Fz is in FMVSS No. 213 and is tested in a meets the requirements specified in S27. tension vehicle with a right front outboard
VerDate 11
vehicle seat that has an anchorage complying with S21.2 shall meet the S22.2.1.5.3 Attach all belts that system as specified in FMVSS No. 225, following test requirements: come with the child restraint that are the vehicle shall comply with the belted S22.2.1 Belted test with forward appropriate for a child of the same test conditions with the restraint facing child restraints or booster seats. height and weight as the 3-year-old anchorage system attached to the S22.2.1.1 Install the restraint in the child dummy, if any, by following, to vehicle seat anchorage system and the right front outboard seat in accordance, the extent possible, the manufacturer’s vehicle seat belt unattached. It shall also to the extent possible, with the child instructions provided with the child comply with the belted test conditions restraint manufacturer’s instructions restraint for seating children. with the restraint anchorage system provided with the seat for use by S22.2.1.6 Booster seat unattached to the vehicle seat anchorage children with the same height and S22.2.1.6.1 Place any adjustable seat system and the vehicle seat belt weight as the 3-year-old child dummy. belt anchorages at the vehicle attached. S22.2.1.2 Locate a vertical plane manufacturer’s nominal design position S22.1.4 Do not attach any tethers. through the longitudinal centerline of for a 50th percentile adult male S22.1.5 The definitions provided in the child restraint. This will be referred occupant. For booster seats designed to S16.3.1 through S16.3.10 apply to the to as ‘‘Plane A’’. be secured to the vehicle seat even tests specified in S22. S22.2.1.3 For bucket seats, ‘‘Plane when empty, cinch the vehicle belts to S22.1.6 For leg and thigh angles use B’’ refers to a vertical longitudinal plane any tension from zero up to 134 N (30 the following references: through the longitudinal centerline of lb) to secure the booster seat. Measure (a) Thigh—a straight line on the thigh the seat cushion of the right front belt tension in a flat, straight section of 5 1 the lap belt between the child restraint skin between the center of the ⁄16 × ⁄2 outboard vehicle seat. For bench seats, in. screw (part 9001024, item 10 in ‘‘Plane B’’ refers to a vertical plane belt path and the contact point with the drawing 210–0000 sheet 2 of 7, through the right front outboard vehicle belt anchor or vehicle seat, on the side complete assembly (HYB III 3 YR OLD)) seat parallel to the vehicle longitudinal away from the buckle (to avoid and the knee bolt (part 210–5301 in centerline the same distance from the interference from the shoulder portion drawing 210–5000–1 & –1, leg longitudinal centerline of the vehicle as of the belt). assembly). the center of the steering wheel. S22.2.1.6.2 Position the 49 CFR Part (b) Leg—a straight line on the leg skin 22.2.1.4 The vehicle shall comply in 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy between the center of the ankle bolt both of the following positions, if in the booster seat such that the (part 210–5701 in drawing 210–5000–1 applicable: dummy’s lower torso is centered on the & –2, leg assembly) and the knee bolt (a) Without attaching the child booster seat cushion and the dummy’s (part 210–5301 in drawing 210–5000–1 restraint anchorage system as specified back is parallel to and in contact with & –2, leg assembly). in S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213 to a vehicle the booster seat back or, if there is no S22.1.7 Seat set-up. Unless seat anchorage system specified in booster seat back, the vehicle seat back. otherwise stated, FMVSS No. 225 and without attaching Place the arms at the dummy’s sides. S22.2.1.6.3 If applicable, attach all S22.1.7.1 Lumbar support any tethers, align the child restraint belts that come with the child restraint adjustment. Position adjustable lumbar system facing forward such that Plane A that are appropriate for a child of the supports so that the lumbar support is is aligned with Plane B. same height and weight as the 3-year- in its lowest, retracted or deflated (b) If the child restraint is certified to old child dummy, if any, by following, adjustment position. S5.9 of FMVSS No. 213, and the vehicle to the extent possible, the seat has an anchorage system as S22.1.7.2 Other seat adjustments. manufacturer’s instructions provided specified in FMVSS No. 225, attach the Position any adjustable parts of the seat with the child restraint for seating child restraint to the vehicle seat that provide additional support so that children. they are in the lowest or most open anchorage instead of aligning the S22.2.1.6.4 If applicable, place the adjustment position. planes. Do not attach the vehicle safety Type 2 manual belt around the test S22.1.7.3 If the seat cushion adjusts belt. dummy and fasten the latch. Remove all fore and aft, independent of the seat S22.2.1.5 Forward facing child slack from the lap belt portion. Pull the back, set this adjustment to the full restraint upper torso webbing out of the retractor rearward position. S22.2.1.5.1 Place any adjustable seat and allow it to retract; repeat this four S22.1.7.4 If the seat height is belt anchorages at the vehicle times. Apply a 9 to 18 N (2 to 4 lb) adjustable, determine the maximum and manufacturer’s nominal design position tension load to the lap belt. Allow the minimum heights at the full rearward for a 50th percentile adult male excess webbing in the upper torso belt seat track position, the middle seat track occupant. Cinch the vehicle belts to any to be retracted by the retractive force of position, and the full forward seat track tension from zero up to 134 N (30 lb) to the retractor. position. Set the seat at the mid-point secure the child restraint. Measure belt S22.2.1.7 Start the vehicle engine or height for each of the three fore-aft test tension in a flat, straight section of the place the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, positions. lap belt between the child restraint belt whichever will turn on the suppression S22.1.7.5 The seat back angle, if path and the contact point with the belt system, and then close all vehicle doors. adjustable, is set at the manufacturer’s anchor or vehicle seat, on the side away S22.2.1.8 Wait 10 seconds, then nominal design seat back angle for a from the buckle (to avoid interference check whether the air bag is deactivated. 50th percentile adult male as specified from the shoulder portion of the belt). S22.2.2 Unbelted tests with in S8.1.3. S22.2.1.5.2 Position the 49 CFR Part dummies. Place the 49 CFR Part 572 S22.1.7.6 If adjustable, set the head 572 Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy Subpart P 3-year-old child dummy on restraint at the full down and full in the child restraint such that the the right front outboard seat in any of forward position. dummy’s lower torso is centered on the the following positions (without using a S22.2 Static tests of automatic child restraint and the dummy’s spine is child restraint or booster seat or the suppression feature which shall result against the seat back of the child vehicle’s seat belts): in deactivation of the passenger air bag. restraint. Place the arms at the dummy’s S22.2.2.1 Sitting on seat with back Each vehicle that is certified as sides. against seat back
VerDate 11
(a) Position the dummy in the seated strength of 311 N (70 lb) may be used standing position on the right front position and place it on the right front to hold the dummy. outboard seat cushion facing the front of outboard seat. (c) Position the dummy’s thighs the vehicle while placing the heels of (b) In the case of vehicles equipped against the seat cushion. the dummy’s feet in contact with the with bench seats, position the (d) Allow the legs of the dummy to seat back. midsagittal plane of the dummy extend off the surface of the seat. (b) Rest the dummy against the seat vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s (e) Position the upper arms parallel to back, with the arms parallel to the longitudinal centerline and the same the spine and rotate the dummy’s lower spine. distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal arms until the dummy’s hands contact (c) If the head contacts the vehicle centerline as the center of the steering the seat cushion. roof, recline the seat so that the head is wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped (f) Start the vehicle engine or place no longer in contact with the vehicle with bucket seats, position the the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, roof, but allow no more than 5 mm (0.2 midsagittal plane of the dummy whichever will turn on the suppression in) distance between the head and the vertically such that it coincides with the system, and then close all vehicle doors. roof. If the seat does not sufficiently longitudinal centerline of the seat (g) Wait 10 seconds, then check recline to allow clearance, omit the test. cushion. Position the torso of the whether the air bag is deactivated. (d) If necessary use a material with a dummy against the seat back. Position S22.2.2.4 Sitting on seat edge, spine maximum breaking strength of 311 N the dummy’s thighs against the seat vertical, hands by the dummy’s sides. (70 lb) or spacer blocks to keep the cushion. (a) In the case of vehicles equipped dummy in position. with bench seats, position the (c) Allow the legs of the dummy to (e) Start the vehicle engine or place midsagittal plane of the dummy extend off the surface of the seat. the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s (d) Rotate the dummy’s upper arms whichever will turn on the suppression longitudinal centerline and the same down until they contact the seat back. system, and then close all vehicle doors. distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal (e) Rotate the dummy’s lower arms (f) Wait 10 seconds, then check centerline as the center of the steering until the dummy’s hands contact the whether the air bag is deactivated. wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped S22.2.2.6 Kneeling on seat, facing seat cushion. with bucket seats, position the forward. (f) Start the vehicle engine or place midsagittal plane of the dummy (a) In the case of vehicles equipped the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, vertically such that it coincides with the with bench seats, position the whichever will turn on the suppression longitudinal centerline of the seat midsagittal plane of the dummy system, and then close all vehicle doors. cushion. vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s (g) Wait 10 seconds, then check (b) Position the dummy in the seated longitudinal centerline and the same whether the air bag is deactivated. position forward in the seat such that distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal S22.2.2.2 Sitting on seat with back the legs are vertical and the back of the centerline as the center of the steering against reclined seat back. Repeat the legs rest against the front of the seat wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped test sequence in S22.2.2.1 with the seat with the spine vertical. If the dummy’s with bucket seats, position the back angle 25 degrees rearward of the feet contact the floor pan, rotate the legs midsagittal plane of the dummy manufacturer’s nominal design position forward until the dummy is resting on vertically such that it coincides with the for the 50th percentile adult male. If the the seat with the feet positioned flat on longitudinal centerline of the seat seat will not recline 25 degrees rearward the floor pan and the dummy spine cushion. of the nominal design position, use the vertical. To keep the dummy in (b) Position the dummy in a kneeling closest position that does not exceed 25 position, a material with a maximum position in the right front outboard seat degrees. breaking strength of 311 N (70 lb) may with the dummy facing the front of the S22.2.2.3 Sitting on seat with back be used to hold the dummy. vehicle with its toes at the intersection not against seat back. (c) Place the upper arms parallel to of the seat back and seat cushion. (a) Position the dummy in the seated the spine. Position the dummy so that the spine is position and place it on the right front (d) Lower the dummy’s lower arms vertical. Push down on the legs so that outboard seat. such that they contact the seat cushion. they contact the seat as much as (b) In the case of vehicles equipped (e) Start the vehicle engine or place possible and then release. Place the with bench seats, position the the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, arms parallel to the spine. midsagittal plane of the dummy whichever will turn on the suppression (c) If necessary use a material with a vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s system, and then close all vehicle doors. maximum breaking strength of 311 N longitudinal centerline and the same (f) Wait 10 seconds, then check (70 lb) or spacer blocks to keep the distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal whether the air bag is deactivated. dummy in position. centerline as the center of the steering S22.2.2.5 Standing on seat, facing (d) Start the vehicle engine or place wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped forward. the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, with bucket seats, position the (a) In the case of vehicles equipped whichever will turn on the suppression midsagittal plane of the dummy with bench seats, position the system, and then close all vehicle doors. vertically such that it coincides with the midsagittal plane of the dummy (e) Wait 10 seconds, then check longitudinal centerline of the seat vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s whether the air bag is deactivated. cushion. Position the dummy with the longitudinal centerline and the same S22.2.2.7 Kneeling on seat, facing spine vertical so that the horizontal distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal rearward. distance from the dummy’s back to the centerline as the center of the steering (a) In the case of vehicles equipped seat back is no less than 25 mm (1.0 in) wheel rim. In the case of vehicles with bench seats, position the and no more than 150 mm (6.0 in), as equipped with bucket seats, position the midsagittal plane of the dummy measured along the dummy’s midsagittal plane of the dummy vertically and parallel to the vehicle’s midsagittal plane at the mid-sternum vertically such that it coincides with the longitudinal centerline and the same level. To keep the dummy in position, longitudinal centerline of the seat distance from the vehicle’s longitudinal a material with a maximum breaking cushion. Position the dummy in a centerline as the center of the steering
VerDate 11
wheel. In the case of vehicles equipped with the right front outboard seating S22.4.2.2.1 The midsagittal plane is with bucket seats, position the position at the full rearward, middle, coincident with Plane D. midsagittal plane of the dummy and, subject to S16.3.3.1.8, full forward S22.4.2.2.2 The legs are initially vertically such that it coincides with the positions. All tests are conducted with vertical to the floor pan. The legs and longitudinal centerline of the seat the seat height, if adjustable, in the mid- thighs shall be adjusted to the extent cushion. height position. necessary for the head/torso to contact (b) Position the dummy in a kneeling S22.3.2 Place a 49 CFR Part 572 the instrument panel as specified in position in the right front outboard seat Subpart O 5th percentile adult female S22.4.2.3. with the dummy facing the rear of the test dummy at the right front outboard S22.4.2.2.3 The upper arms are vehicle. Position the dummy such that seating position of the vehicle, in parallel to the torso and the hands are the dummy’s head and torso are in accordance with procedures specified in in contact with the thighs. contact with the seat back. Push down S16.3.3 of this standard, except as S22.4.2.3 Without changing the seat on the legs so that they contact the seat specified in S22.3.1. Do not fasten the position and with the dummy’s thorax as much as possible and then release. seat belt. instrument cavity rear face vertical, Place the arms parallel to the spine. S22.3.3 Start the vehicle engine or move the dummy forward until the (c) Start the vehicle engine or place place the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, dummy head/torso contacts the the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, whichever will turn on the suppression instrument panel. If the dummy loses whichever will turn on the suppression system, and then close all vehicle doors. contact with the seat cushion because of system, and then close all vehicle doors. S22.3.4 Wait 10 seconds, then check the forward movement, maintain the (d) Wait 10 seconds, then check whether the air bag system is activated. height of the dummy and the angle of whether the air bag is deactivated. S22.4 Low risk deployment tests. the thigh with respect to the torso. Once S22.2.2.8 Lying on seat. This test is S22.4.1 Each vehicle that is certified contact is made, raise the dummy performed only in vehicles with 3 as complying with S21.4 shall meet the vertically until Point 1 lies in Plane C. designated front seating positions. following test requirements with the 49 If the dummy’s head contacts the (a) Lay the dummy on the right front CFR Part 572, Subpart P 3-year-old child windshield and keeps Point 1 from outboard seat such that the following dummy in both of the following reaching Plane C, lower the dummy criteria are met: positions: Position 1 (S22.4.2) and until there is no more than 5 mm (0.2 (1) The midsagittal plane of the Position 2 (S22.4.3). in) clearance between the head and the dummy is horizontal, S22.4.1.1 Locate and mark a point windshield. (The dummy shall remain (2) The dummy’s spine is on the front of the dummy’s chest jacket in contact with the instrument panel perpendicular to the vehicle’s on the midsaggital plane which is 114 while being raised or lowered, which longitudinal axis, mm (4.5 in) ± 3 mm (± 0.1 in) along the may change the dummy’s fore-aft (3) The dummy’s arms are parallel to surface of the skin from the top of the position.) its spine, skin at the neck line. This is referred to S22.4.2. If possible, position the legs (4) A plane passing through the two as ‘‘Point 1.’’ of the dummy so that the legs are shoulder joints of the dummy is vertical, S22.4.1.2 Locate the vertical plane vertical and the feet rest flat on the floor (5) The anterior of the dummy is parallel to the vehicle longitudinal pan of the vehicle. If the positioning facing the vehicle front, (6) The head of the dummy is centerline through the geometric center against the instrument panel does not positioned towards the passenger door, of the opening through which the right allow the feet to be on the floor pan, the and front air bag deploys into the occupant feet shall be parallel to the floor pan. (7) The horizontal distance from the compartment. This is referred to as S22.4.2.5 If necessary, material with topmost point of the dummy’s head to ‘‘Plane D.’’ a maximum breaking strength of 311 N the vehicle door is 50 to 100 mm (2–4 S22.4.1.3 Locate the horizontal (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used in). plane through the geometric center of to support the dummy in position. The (8) The dummy is as far back in the the opening through which the right material should support the torso rather seat as possible. front air bag deploys into the occupant than the head. Support the dummy so (b) Rotate the thighs as much as compartment. This is referred to as that there is minimum interference with possible toward the chest of the dummy ‘‘Plane C.’’ the full rotational and translational and rotate the legs as much as possible S22.4.2 Position 1 (chest on freedom for the upper torso of the against the thighs. instrument panel). dummy and the material does not (c) Move the dummy’s upper left arm S22.4.2.1 If a seat is adjustable in the interfere with the air bag. parallel to the vehicle’s transverse plane fore and aft and/or vertical directions, S22.4.3 Position 2 (head on and the lower left arm 90 degrees to the move the seat to the rear-most seating instrument panel). upper arm. Rotate the lower left arm position and full-down height S22.4.3.1 Place the passenger seat in about the elbow joint and toward the adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts the full rearward seating position. Place dummy’s head until movement is fore and aft, independent of the entire the seat back at the manufacturer’s obstructed. seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full- nominal design seat back angle for a (d) Start the vehicle engine or place rearward position. If the seat back is 50th percentile adult male as specified the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, adjustable, place the seat back at the in S8.1.3. If adjustable in the vertical whichever will turn on the suppression manufacturer’s nominal design seat direction, place the seat in the mid- system, and then close all vehicle doors. back angle for a 50th percentile adult height position. If the seat cushion (e) Wait 10 seconds, then check male as specified in S8.1.3. Position any adjusts fore and aft, independent of the whether the air bag is deactivated. adjustable parts of the seat that provide entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the S22.3 Static tests of automatic additional support so that they are in full rearward position. Position any suppression feature which shall result the lowest or most open adjustment adjustable parts of the seat that provide in activation of the passenger air bag position. If adjustable, set the head additional support so that they are in system. restraint in the lowest position. the lowest or most open adjustment S22.3.1 Each vehicle certified to this S22.4.2.2 Place the dummy in the position. If adjustable, set the head option shall comply in tests conducted front passenger seat such that: restraint in the lowest position.
VerDate 11
S22.4.3.2 Place the dummy in the S22.5 Test procedure for S23.2.3 The vehicle shall be front passenger seat such that: determining stages of air bag systems equipped with a mechanism that S22.4.3.2.1 The midsagittal plane is subject to low risk deployment (low indicates whether the air bag is coincident with Plane D. speed crashes) test requirement. suppressed, regardless of whether the S22.4.3.2.2 The legs are vertical to S22.5.1 The test described in S22.5.2 passenger seat is occupied. The the floor pan, the back of the legs are in shall be conducted with an unbelted mechanism need not be located in the contact with the seat cushion, and the 50th percentile adult male test dummy occupant compartment unless it is the dummy’s thorax instrument cavity rear in the driver seating position according telltale described in S23.2.2. face is vertical. If it is not possible to to S8 as it applies to that seating S23.3 Option 2—Dynamic automatic position the dummy with the legs in the position and an unbelted 5th percentile suppression system that suppresses the prescribed position, rotate the legs adult female test dummy either in the air bag when an occupant is out of forward until the dummy is resting on right front seating position according to position. (This option is available under the seat with the feet positioned flat on S16 as it applies to that seating position the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The the floor pan, and the back of the legs or at any fore-aft seat position on the vehicle shall be equipped with a are in contact with the front of the seat passenger side. dynamic automatic suppression system cushion. Set the transverse distance S22.5.2 Impact the vehicle traveling for the passenger frontal air bag system between the longitudinal centerlines at longitudinally forward at any speed, up which meets the requirements specified the front of the dummy’s knees at 86 to to and including 26 km/h (16 mph) into in S27. 91 mm (3.4 to 3.6 in), with the thighs a fixed rigid barrier that is S23.4 Option 3—Low risk and the legs of the dummy in vertical perpendicular ± 5 degrees to the line of deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the planes. travel of the vehicle under the injury criteria specified in S23.5 of this S22.4.3.2.3 The upper arms are applicable conditions of S8, S10, and standard when the passenger air bag is parallel to the torso and the hands are S16 excluding S10.7, S10.8, S10.9, and statically deployed in accordance with in contact with the thighs. S16.3.5. both of the low risk deployment test S22.4.3.3 Move the seat forward, procedures specified in S24.4. while maintaining the thorax S22.5.3 Determine which inflation stage or combination of stages are fired S23.5 Injury criteria for the 49 CFR instrument cavity rear face orientation Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-old child until any part of the dummy contacts and determine the time delay between successive stages. That stage or dummy. the vehicle’s instrument panel. S23.5.1 All portions of the test S22.4.3.4 If dummy contact has not combination of stages, with time delay between successive stages, shall be used dummy shall be contained within the been made with the vehicle’s outer surfaces of the vehicle passenger instrument panel at the full forward in deploying the air bag when conducting the low risk deployment compartment. seating position of the seat, slide the S23.5.2 Head injury criteria. dummy forward until contact is made. tests described in S22.4, S24.4, and S26. (a) For any two points in time, t1 and Maintain the thorax instrument cavity S22.5.4 If the air bag does not deploy in the impact described in t2, during the event which are separated rear face vertical orientation, the height by not more than a 15 millisecond time of the dummy, and the angle of the S22.5.2, the low risk deployment tests described in S22.4, S24.4, and S26 shall interval and where t1 is less than t2, the thigh with respect to the horizontal. head injury criterion (HIC ) shall be S22.4.3.5 If head/torso contact with be conducted with all stages using the 15 determined using the resultant head the instrument panel has not been maximum time delay between stages. acceleration at the center of gravity of made, maintain the angle of the thighs S23 Requirements using 6-year-old the dummy head, a , expressed as a with respect to the horizontal while child dummies. r multiple of g (the acceleration of applying a force towards the front of the S23.1 Each vehicle that is certified gravity) and shall be calculated using vehicle on the spine of the dummy as complying with S14 shall, at the the expression: between the shoulder joints until the option of the manufacturer, meet the requirements specified in S23.2, S23.3, head or torso comes into contact with 25. or S23.4, under the test procedures 1 t2 the vehicle’s instrument panel. () S22.4.3.6 If necessary, material with specified in S24 or S28, as applicable. ∫ adtr tt21 ()tt t1 a maximum breaking strength of 311 N S23.2 Option 1—Automatic 21 (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used suppression feature. Each vehicle shall (b) The maximum calculated HIC15 to support the dummy in position. The meet the requirements specified in value shall not exceed 700. material should support the torso rather S23.2.1 through S23.2.3. S23.5.3 The resultant acceleration than the head. Support the dummy so S23.2.1 The vehicle shall be calculated from the output of the that there is minimum interference with equipped with an automatic thoracic instrumentation shall not the full rotational and translational suppression feature for the passenger exceed 60 g’s, except for intervals whose freedom for the upper torso of the frontal air bag system which results in cumulative duration is not more than 3 dummy and the material does not deactivation of the air bag during each milliseconds. interfere with the air bag. of the static tests specified in S24.2 S23.5.4 Compression deflection of S22.4.4 Deploy the right front (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6- the sternum relative to the spine, as outboard frontal air bag system. If the year-old child dummy in any of the determined by instrumentation, shall frontal air bag system contains a child restraints specified in section D of not exceed 40 mm (l.6 in). multistage inflator, the vehicle shall be Appendix A of this standard), and S23.5.5 Neck injury. When able to comply with the injury criteria activation of the air bag system during measuring neck injury, each of the at any stage or combination of stages or each of the static tests specified in S24.3 following injury criteria shall be met. time delay between successive stages (using a 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th (a) Nij. that could occur in a rigid barrier crash percentile adult female dummy). (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force test at or below 26 km/h (16 mph), S23.2.2 The vehicle shall be (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be under the test procedure specified in equipped with a telltale light meeting measured by the dummy upper neck S22.5. the requirements specified in S19.2.2. load cell for the duration of the crash
VerDate 11
event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, shall comply in tests conducted with S22.2, except that the 49 CFR Part 572 axial force, and bending moment shall the right front outboard seating position Subpart N 6-year-old child dummy shall be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ at the full rearward seat track position, be used. 1 rev. Mar95 Channel Frequency Class the middle seat track position, and the S24.2.2 Exceptions. The tests 600 (see S4.7). full forward seat track position. If the specified in the following paragraphs of (2) During the event, the axial force dummy contacts the vehicle interior, S22.2 need not be conducted: S22.2.1.5, (Fz) can be either in tension or move the seat rearward to the next S22.2.2.3, S22.2.2.5, S22.2.2.6, compression while the occipital condyle detent that provides clearance. If the S22.2.2.7, and S22.2.2.8. bending moment (Mocy) can be in either seat is a power seat, move the seat S24.2.3 Sitting back in the seat and flexion or extension. This results in four rearward while assuring that there is a leaning on the right front passenger possible loading conditions for Nij: maximum of 5 mm (0.2 in) distance door tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion between the vehicle interior and the (a) Position the dummy in the seated (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or point on the dummy that would first position and place the dummy in the compression-flexion (Ncf). contact the vehicle interior. All tests are right front outboard seat. For bucket (3) When calculating Nij using conducted with the seat height, if seats, position the midsagittal plane of equation S23.5.5(a)(4), the critical adjustable, in the mid-height position, the dummy vertically such that it values, Fzc and Myc, are: and with the seat back angle, if coincides with the longitudinal center (i) Fzc = 2800 N (629 lbf) when Fz is in adjustable, at the manufacturer=s line of the seat cushion. For bench seats, tension nominal design seat back angle for a position the midsagittal plane of the (ii) Fzc = 2800 N (629 lbf) when Fz is 50th percentile adult male as specified dummy vertically and parallel to the in compression in S8.1.3. vehicle=s longitudinal centerline and (iii) Myc = 93 Nm (69 lbf-ft) when a S24.1.3 Except as otherwise the same distance from the longitudinal flexion moment exists at the specified, if the booster seat has an centerline of the vehicle as the center of occipital condyle anchorage system as specified in S5.9 of the steering wheel. (iv) Myc = 37 Nm (27 lbf-ft) when an FMVSS No. 213 and is tested in a (b) Place the dummy’s back against extension moment exists at the vehicle with a right front outboard occipital condyle. the seat back and rest the dummy’s vehicle seat that has an anchorage thighs on the seat cushion. (4) At each point in time, only one of system as specified in FMVSS No. 225, (c) Allow the legs and feet of the the four loading conditions occurs and the vehicle shall comply with the belted dummy to extend off the surface of the the Nij value corresponding to that test conditions with the restraint seat. If this positioning of the dummy’s loading condition is computed and the anchorage system attached to the legs is prevented by contact with the three remaining loading modes shall be vehicle seat anchorage system and the instrument panel, move the seat considered a value of zero. The vehicle seat belt unattached. It shall also rearward to the next detent that expression for calculating each Nij comply with the belted test conditions provides clearance. If the seat is a power loading condition is given by: with the restraint anchorage system seat, move the seat rearward, while Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc) unattached to the vehicle seat anchorage assuring that there is a maximum of 5 (5) None of the four Nij values shall system and the vehicle seat belt mm (0.2 in) distance between the exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. attached. The vehicle shall comply with vehicle interior and the part of the (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), the unbelted test conditions with the dummy that was in contact with the measured at the upper neck load cell, restraint anchorage system unattached vehicle interior. shall not exceed 1490 N (335 lbf) at any to the vehicle seat anchorage system. (d) Rotate the dummy’s upper arms time. S24.1.4 Do not attach any tethers. toward the seat back until they make (c) Peak compression. Compression S24.1.5 The definitions provided in contact. force (Fz), measured at the upper neck S16.3.1 through S16.3.10 apply to the (e) Rotate the dummy’s lower arms load cell, shall not exceed 1820 N (409 tests specified in S24. down until they contact the seat. lbf) at any time. S24.1.6 For leg and thigh angles, use S23.5.6 Unless otherwise indicated, the following references: (f) Close the vehicle’s passenger-side instrumentation for data acquisition, S24.1.6.1 Thigh—a straight line on door and then start the vehicle engine data channel frequency class, and the thigh skin between the center of the or place the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ moment calculations are the same as 5/16–18 UNC–2B threaded access hole position, whichever will turn on the given for the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart in the upper leg clamp (drawing 127– suppression system. N 6-year-old child test dummy. 4004, 6 YR H3—upper leg clamp) and (g) Push against the dummy’s left S24 Test procedure for S23. the knee screw (part 9000248 in shoulder to lean the dummy against the S24.1 General provisions and drawing 127–4000–1 & –2, leg door; close all remaining doors. definitions. assembly). (h) Wait 10 seconds, then check S24.1.1 Tests specifying the use of a S24.1.6.2 Leg—a straight line on the whether the air bag is deactivated. booster seat may be conducted using leg skin between the center of the lower S24.3 Static tests of automatic any such restraint listed in section D of leg screw (part 9001170 in drawing 127– suppression feature which shall result Appendix A of this standard. The 4000–1 & –2, leg assembly) and the knee in activation of the passenger air bag booster seat may be unused or have screw (part 9000248 in drawing 127– system. been previously used only for automatic 4000–1 & –2, leg assembly). S24.3.1 Each vehicle certified to this suppression. If it has been used, there S24.2 Static tests of automatic option shall comply in tests conducted shall not be any visible damage prior to suppression feature which shall result with the right front outboard seating the test. Booster seats are to be used in in deactivation of the passenger air bag. position at the full rearward seat track the manner appropriate for a 6-year-old Each vehicle that is certified as position, the middle seat track position, child of the same height and weight as complying with S23.2 shall meet the and, subject to S16.3.3.1.8, the full the 6-year-old child dummy. following test requirements. forward seat track position. All tests are S24.1.2 Unless otherwise specified, S24.2.1 Except as provided in conducted with the seat height, if each vehicle certified to this option S24.2.2, conduct all tests as specified in adjustable, in the mid-height position.
VerDate 11
S24.3.2 Place a 49 CFR Part 572 (b) The upper arms are parallel to the dummy’s thorax instrument cavity rear Subpart O 5th percentile adult female torso and the hands are next to where face is 6 degrees forward of vertical. If test dummy at the right front outboard the thighs would be. it is not possible to position the dummy seating position of the vehicle, in (c) Without changing the seat position with the legs in the prescribed position, accordance with procedures specified in and with the dummy’s thorax rotate the legs forward until the dummy S16.3.3 of this standard, except as instrument cavity rear face 6 degrees is resting on the seat with the feet specified in S24.3.1. Do not fasten the forward of the vertical, move the positioned flat on the floor pan and the seat belt. dummy forward until the dummy head/ back of the legs are in contact with the S24.3.3 Start the vehicle engine or torso contacts the instrument panel. If front of the seat cushion. Set the place the ignition in the ‘‘on’’ position, the dummy loses contact with the seat transverse distance between the whichever will turn on the suppression cushion because of the forward longitudinal centerlines at the front of system, and then close all vehicle doors. movement, maintain the height of the the dummy’s knees at 112 to 117 mm S24.3.4 Wait 10 seconds, then check dummy while moving the dummy (4.4. to 4.6 in), with the thighs and the whether the air bag system is activated. forward. If the head contacts the legs of the dummy in vertical planes. windshield before head/torso contact (c) The upper arms are parallel to the S24.4 Low risk deployment tests. with the instrument panel, maintain the torso and the hands are in contact with S24.4.1 Each vehicle that is certified thorax instrument cavity angle and the thighs. as complying with S23.4 shall meet the move the dummy forward such that the S24.4.3.3 Move the seat forward, following test requirements with the 49 head is following the angle of the while maintaining the thorax CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6-year-old child windshield until there is head/torso instrument cavity rear face orientation dummy in both of the following contact with the instrument panel. Once until any part of the dummy contacts positions: Position 1 (S24.4.2) or contact is made, raise or lower the the vehicle’s instrument panel. Position 2 (S24.4.3). dummy vertically until Point 1 lies in S24.4.3.4 If dummy contact has not S24.4.1.1 Locate and mark a point Plane C. If the dummy’s head contacts been made with the vehicle’s on the front of the dummy’s chest jacket the windshield and keeps Point 1 from instrument panel at the full forward on the midsagittal plane which is 139 reaching Plane C, lower the dummy seating position of the seat, slide the mm (5.5 in) ± 3 mm (± 0.1 in) along the until there is no more than 5 mm (0.2 dummy forward on the seat until surface of the skin from the top of the in) clearance between the head and the contact is made. Maintain the thorax skin at the neckline. This is referred to windshield. (The dummy shall remain instrument cavity rear face orientation, as ‘‘Point 1.’’ in contact with the instrument panel the height of the dummy, and the angle S24.4.1.2 Locate the vertical plane while being raised or lowered which of the thigh with respect to the parallel to the vehicle longitudinal may change the dummy’s fore-aft horizontal. centerline through the geometric center position.) S24.4.3.5 If head/torso contact has of the opening through which the right S24.4.2.4 If necessary, material with not been made with the instrument front air bag deploys into the occupant a maximum breaking strength of 311 N panel, maintain the angle of the thighs compartment. This is referred to as (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used with respect to the horizontal while ‘‘Plane D.’’ to support the dummy in position. The applying a force towards the front of the S24.4.1.3 Locate the horizontal material should support the torso rather vehicle on the spine of the dummy plane through the geometric center of than the head. Support the dummy so between the shoulder joints until the the opening through which the right that there is minimum interference with head/torso comes into contact with the front air bag deploys into the occupant the full rotational and translational vehicle’s instrument panel. compartment. This is referred to as freedom for the upper torso of the S24.4.3.6 If necessary, material with ‘‘Plane C.’’ dummy and the material does not a maximum breaking strength of 311 N S24.4.2 Position 1 (chest on interfere with the air bag. (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used instrument panel). S24.4.3 Position 2 (head on to support the dummy in position. Material should support the torso rather S24.4.2.1 If a seat is adjustable in the instrument panel). S24.4.3.1 Place the passenger seat in than the head. Support the dummy so fore and aft and/or vertical directions, the full rearward seating position. Place that there is minimum interference with move the seat to the rearmost seating the seat back at the manufacturer’s the full rotational and translational position and full down height nominal design seat back angle for a freedom for the upper torso of the adjustment. If the seat cushion adjusts 50th percentile adult male as specified dummy and the material does not fore and aft, independent of the entire in S8.1.3. If adjustable in the vertical interfere with the air bag. seat, adjust the seat cushion to the full direction, place the seat in the mid- S24.4.4 Deploy the right front rearward position. If the seat back is height position. If the seat cushion outboard frontal air bag system. If the adjustable, place the seat back at the adjusts fore and aft, independent of the frontal air bag system contains a manufacturer’s nominal design seat entire seat, adjust the seat cushion to the multistage inflator, the vehicle shall be back angle for a 50th percentile adult full rearward position. Position any able to comply with the injury criteria male as specified in S8.1.3. Position any adjustable parts of the seat that provide at any stage or combination of stages adjustable parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they are in and at any time delay between additional support so that they are in the lowest or most open adjustment successive stages that could occur in a the lowest or most open adjustment position. Position an adjustable head rigid barrier crash at speeds up to 26 position. Position an adjustable head restraint in the lowest position. km/h (16 mph) under the test procedure restraint in the lowest position. S24.4.3.2 Place the dummy in the specified in S22.5. S24.4.2.2 Remove the legs of the front passenger seat such that: S25 Requirements using an out-of- dummy at the pelvic interface. (a) The midsagittal plane is coincident position 5th percentile adult female S24.4.2.3 Place the dummy in the with Plane D. dummy at the driver position. front passenger seat such that: (b) The legs are perpendicular to the S25.1 Each vehicle certified as (a) The midsagittal plane is coincident floor pan, the back of the legs are in complying with S14 shall, at the option with Plane D. contact with the seat cushion, and the of the manufacturer, meet the
VerDate 11
requirements specified in S25.2 or S25.3 (b) Peak tension. Tension force (Fz), S26.2.4.2 The legs are perpendicular under the test procedures specified in measured at the upper neck load cell, to the floor pan and the back of the legs S26 or S28, as appropriate. shall not exceed 2070 N (465 lbf) at any are in contact with the seat cushion. The S25.2 Option 1—Dynamic automatic time. legs may be adjusted if necessary to suppression system that suppresses the (c) Peak compression. Compression achieve the final head position. air bag when the driver is out of force (Fz), measured at the upper neck S26.2.4.3 The dummy’s thorax position. (This option is available under load cell, shall not exceed 2520 N (566 instrument cavity rear face is 6 degrees the conditions set forth in S27.1.) The lbf) at any time. forward (toward the front of the vehicle) vehicle shall be equipped with a (d) Unless otherwise indicated, of the steering wheel angle (i.e., if the dynamic automatic suppression system instrumentation for data acquisition, steering wheel angle is 25 degrees from for the driver air bag which meets the data channel frequency class, and vertical, the thorax instrument cavity requirements specified in S27. moment calculations are the same as rear face angle is 31 degrees). S25.3 Option 2—Low risk given in 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th S26.2.4.4 The initial transverse deployment. Each vehicle shall meet the percentile female test dummy. distance between the longitudinal injury criteria specified by S15.3 of this S26 Procedure for low risk centerlines at the front of the dummy’s standard, except as modified in S25.4, deployment tests of driver air bag. knees is 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 6.7 in), when the driver air bag is statically S26.1 Each vehicle that is certified with the thighs and legs of the dummy deployed in accordance with both of the as complying with S25.3 shall meet the in vertical planes. low risk deployment test procedures requirements of S25.3 and S25.4 with S26.2.4.5 The upper arms are specified in S26. the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart O 5th parallel to the torso and the hands are S25.4 Neck injury criteria driver low percentile adult female dummy in both in contact with the thighs. risk deployment tests. When measuring of the following positions: Driver S26.2.5 Maintaining the spine angle, neck injury in low risk deployment tests position 1 (S26.2) and Driver position 2 for the driver position, each of the slide the dummy forward until the (S26.3). following neck injury criteria shall be head/torso contacts the steering wheel. met. S26.2 Driver position 1 (chin on S26.2.6 While maintaining the spine (a) Nij. module). angle, adjust the height of the dummy (1) The shear force (Fx), axial force S26.2.1 Adjust the steering controls so so that a point on the chin 40 mm below (Fz), and bending moment (My) shall be that the steering wheel hub is at the the center of the mouth (chin point) is measured by the dummy upper neck geometric center of the locus it in the same horizontal plane as the load cell for the duration of the crash describes when it is moved through its geometric center of the opening through event as specified in S4.11. Shear force, full range of driving positions. If there which the air bag deploys into the axial force, and bending moment shall is no setting at the geometric center, occupant compartment. If the seat be filtered for Nij purposes at SAE J211/ position it one setting lower than the prevents the chin point from being in 1 rev. Mar 95 Channel Frequency Class geometric center. Set the rotation of the the same horizontal plane, adjust the 600 (see S4.7). steering wheel so that the vehicle dummy height to as close to the (2) During the event, the axial force wheels are pointed straight ahead. prescribed position as possible. (Fz) can be either in tension or S26.2.2 Locate the vertical plane S26.2.7 If necessary, material with a compression while the occipital condyle parallel to the vehicle longitudinal axis maximum breaking strength of 311 N bending moment (Mocy) can be in either which passes through the geometric (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used flexion or extension. This results in four center of the opening through which the to support the dummy in position. The possible loading conditions for Nij: driver air bag deploys into the occupant material should support the torso rather tension-extension (Nte), tension-flexion compartment. This is referred to as than the head. Support the dummy so (Ntf), compression-extension (Nce), or ‘‘Plane E.’’ that there is minimum interference with compression-flexion (Ncf). S26.2.3 Place the seat in the full the full rotational and translational (3) When calculating Nij using rearward seating position. If adjustable freedom for the upper torso of the equation S25.4(a)(4), the critical values, in the vertical direction, place the seat dummy and the material does not Fzc and Myc, are: in the mid-height position. If the seat interfere with the air bag. (i) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is in cushion adjusts fore and aft, S26.3 Driver position 2 (chin on tension independent of the entire seat, adjust rim). (ii) Fzc = 3880 N (872 lbf) when Fz is the seat cushion to the full rearward S26.3.1 Place the seat in the full in compression position. If the seat back is adjustable, rearward seating position. If adjustable (iii) Myc = 155 Nm (114 lbf-ft) when a place the seat back at the manufacturer’s in the vertical direction, place the seat flexion moment exists at the nominal design seat back angle for a in the mid-height position. If the seat occipital condyle 50th percentile adult male as specified cushion adjusts fore and aft, (iv) Myc = 61 Nm (45 lbf-ft) when an in S8.1.3. If the seat cushion contains an independent of the entire seat, adjust extension moment exists at the independent seat cushion angle the seat cushion to the full rearward occipital condyle. adjustment mechanism, adjust the seat position. If the seatback is adjustable, (4) At each point in time, only one of cushion angle to the middle of the range place the seat back at the manufacturer’s the four loading conditions occurs and of seat cushion angles. Position any nominal design seat back angle for a the Nij value corresponding to that adjustable parts of the seat that provide 50th percentile adult male as specified loading condition is computed and the additional support so that they are in in S8.1.3. If the seat cushion contains an three remaining loading modes shall be the lowest or most open adjustment independent seat cushion angle considered a value of zero. The position. Position an adjustable head adjustment mechanism, adjust the seat expression for calculating each Nij restrain in the lowest position. cushion angle to the middle of the range loading condition is given by: S26.2.4 Place the dummy in the of seat cushion angles. Position any Nij = (Fz / Fzc) + (Mocy / Myc) driver’s seat such that: adjustable parts of the seat that provide (5) None of the four Nij values shall S26.2.4.1 The midsagittal plane is additional support so that they are in exceed 1.0 at any time during the event. coincident with Plane E. the lowest or most open adjustment
VerDate 11
position. Position an adjustable head contact with the rim of the uppermost who weighs between 13.4 and 18 kg restraint in the lowest position. portion of the steering wheel. (29.5 and 39.5 lb), and who is between S26.3.2 Adjust the steering controls S26.3.8 If necessary, material with a 89 and 99 cm (35 and 39 in) tall may so that the steering wheel hub is at the maximum breaking strength of 311 N be used. geometric center of the locus it (70 lb) and spacer blocks may be used (e) For S23.2 and S23.5.1, instead of describes when it is moved through its to support the dummy in position. The using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart N 6- full range of driving positions. If there material should support the torso rather year-old child dummy, a human child is no setting at the geometric center, than the head. Support the dummy so who weighs between 21 and 25.6 kg position it one setting lower than the that there is minimum interference with (46.5 and 56.5 lb), and who is between geometric center. Set the rotation of the the full rotational and translational 114 and 124.5 cm (45 and 49 in) tall steering wheel so that the vehicle freedom for the upper torso of the may be used. wheels are pointed straight ahead. dummy and the material does not (f) For S19.2, S21.2, and S23.2, S26.3.3 Locate the vertical plane interfere with the air bag. instead of using the 49 CFR Part 572 parallel to the vehicle longitudinal axis S26.4 Deploy the left front outboard Subpart O 5th percentile adult female which passes through the geometric frontal air bag system. If the air bag test dummy, a female who weighs center of the opening through which the system contains a multistage inflator, between 46.7 and 51.25 kg (103 and 113 driver air bag deploys into the occupant the vehicle shall be able to comply with lb), and who is between 139.7 and 150 compartment. This is referred to as the injury criteria at any stage or cm (55 and 59 in) tall may be used. ‘‘Plane E.’’ combination of stages or time delay S29.2 Human beings shall be S26.3.4 Place the dummy in the between successive stages that could dressed in a cotton T-shirt, full length driver’s seat position such that: occur in a rigid barrier crash at speeds cotton trousers, and sneakers. Specified S26.3.4.1 The midsagittal plane is up to 26 km/h (16 mph) under the test weights and heights include clothing. coincident with Plane E. procedure specified in S22.5. S29.3 A manufacturer exercising S26.3.4.2 The legs are perpendicular this option shall upon request: * * * * * (a) Provide NHTSA with a method to to the floor pan and the back of the legs S29 Manufacturer option to certify deactivate the air bag during compliance are in contact with the seat cushion. The vehicles to certain static suppression testing under S20.2, S20.3, S22.2, S22.3, legs may be adjusted if necessary to test requirements using human beings S24.2, and S24.3, and identify any parts achieve the final head position. rather than test dummies. or equipment necessary for deactivation; S26.3.4.3 The dummy’s thorax S29.1 At the option of the such assurance may be made by instrument cavity rear face is 6 degrees manufacturer, instead of using test removing the air bag; and forward (toward the front of the vehicle) dummies in conducting the tests for the (b) Provide NHTSA with a method to of the steering wheel angle (i.e., if the following automatic suppression and assure that the same test results would steering wheel angle is 25 degrees from occupant recognition parts of the low be obtained if the air bag were not vertical, the thorax instrument cavity risk deployment test requirements, deactivated. rear face angle is 31 degrees). human beings may be used as specified. * * * * * S26.3.4.4 The initial transverse If human beings are used, they shall distance between the longitudinal assume, to the extent possible, the final Appendix A to § 571.208—Selection of centerlines at the front of the dummy’s physical position specified for the Child Restraint Systems knees is 160 to 170 mm (6.3 to 6.7 in), corresponding dummies for each test. A. The following car bed, manufactured on with the thighs and legs of the dummy (a) If a manufacturer decides to certify or after December 1, 1999, may be used by in vertical planes. a vehicle using a human being for a test the National Highway Traffic Safety S26.3.4.5 The upper arms are of the passenger automatic suppression, Administration to test the suppression parallel to the torso and the hands are it shall use humans for the entire series system of a vehicle that has been certified as in contact with the thighs. of tests, e.g., 3-year-old children for each being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 S26.3.5 Maintaining the spine angle, test of the system involving 3-year-old S19: slide the dummy forward until the test dummies. If a manufacturer decides Cosco Dream Ride 02–719 head/torso contacts the steering wheel. to certify a vehicle using a test dummy B. Any of the following rear facing child S26.3.6 While maintaining the spine for a test of the system, it shall use test restraint systems, manufactured on or after angle, position the dummy so that a dummies for the entire series of tests, December 1, 1999, may be used by the point on the chin 40 mm below the e.g., a Hybrid III 3-year-old child National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to test the suppression center of the mouth (chin point) is in dummy for each test of the system system of a vehicle that has been certified as contact with the rim of the uppermost involving 3-year-old child test being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 portion of the steering wheel. If the dummies. S19. When the restraint system comes dummy’s head contacts the vehicle (b) For S19.2, instead of using the 49 equipped with a removable base, the test may windshield or upper interior before the CFR Part 572 Subpart R 12-month-old be run either with the base attached or prescribed position can be obtained, child dummy, a human child who without the base. lower the dummy until there is no more weighs between 8.2 and 9.1 kg (18 and Britax Handle with Care 191 than 5 mm (0.2 in) clearance between 20 lb), and who is between 61 and 66 Century Assura 4553 the vehicle’s windshield or upper cm (24 and 26 in) tall may be used. Century Avanta SE 41530 interior, as applicable. (c) For S19.2, instead of using the 49 Century Smart Fit 4543 S26.3.7 If the steering wheel can be CFR Part 572 Subpart K newborn infant Cosco Arriva 02727 Cosco Opus 35 02603 adjusted so that the chin point can be dummy, a human child who weighs Evenflo Discovery Adjust Right 212 in contact with the rim of the uppermost between 8.2 and 9.1 kg (18 and 20 lb), Evenflo First Choice 204 portion of the steering wheel, adjust the and who is between 61 and 66 cm (24 Evenflo On My Way Position Right V 282 steering wheel to that position and and 26 in) tall may be used. Graco Infant 8457 readjust the spine angle to coincide with (d) For S21.2 and S21.5.1, instead of C. Any of the following forward-facing the steering wheel angle. Position the using the 49 CFR Part 572 Subpart P 3- convertible child restraint systems, dummy so that the chin point is in year-old child dummy, a human child manufactured on or after December 1, 1999,
VerDate 11
may be used by the National Highway Traffic Evenflo Horizon V 425 Britax Roadster 9004 Safety Administration to test the suppression Evenflo Medallion 254 Century Next Step 4920 system of a vehicle that has been certified as D. Any of the following forward-facing Cosco High Back Booster 02–442 being in compliance with 49 CFR 571.208 toddler/belt positioning booster systems, Evenflo Right Fit 245 S19, or S21: manufactured on or after December 1, 1999, Issued on December 6, 2001. Britax Roundabout 161 may be used by the National Highway Traffic Jeffery W. Runge, Century Encore 4612 Safety Administration as test devices to test Century STE 1000 4416 the suppression system of a vehicle that has Administrator. Cosco Olympian 02803 been certified as being in compliance with 49 [FR Doc. 01–30754 Filed 12–17–01; 8:45 am] Cosco Touriva 02519 CFR 571.208 S21 or S23: BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate 11
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 66, No. 243 Tuesday, December 18, 2001
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING DECEMBER
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–523–5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the revision date of each title. Laws 523–5227 3 CFR 34...... 64737 40...... 64737 Presidential Documents Proclamations: 50...... 64737 Executive orders and proclamations 523–5227 7507...... 62907 51...... 64737 The United States Government Manual 523–5227 7508...... 62909 430...... 65091 7509...... 62911 Proposed Rules: 7510...... 63149 Other Services 54...... 65141 7511...... 63899 72...... 63964 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523–3447 7512...... 64497 Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 7513...... 64095 12 CFR Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 7514...... 65089 5...... 62914 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229 Executive Orders: 1773...... 65097 11582 (See EO Proposed Rules: 13238) ...... 63903 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH Ch. IX...... 63008 12958 (See Order of 226...... 64381 World Wide Web December 10, 360...... 65144 2001) ...... 64347 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 584...... 63517 13238...... 63903 is located at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 1750...... 65146 13239...... 64907 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Orders: 13 CFR Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: Order of December 10, 120...... 64739 http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 2001 ...... 64347 E-mail Administrative Orders: 14 CFR Presidential Determinations: FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 25...... 64349 No. 02–07 of an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 39 ...... 60140, 60143, 60144, November 21, form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 60145, 62915, 63154, 63157, 2001 ...... 63487 of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 63159, 63307, 63621, 63912, PDF links to the full text of each document. Memorandums: 63913, 63915, 64097, 64099, December 7, 2001...... 64735 64100, 64102, 64104, 64105, To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 64107, 64109, 64112, 64114, Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 5 CFR 64116, 64117, 64119, 64121, (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 302...... 63905 64124, 64125, 64128, 64129, PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 317...... 63905 64132, 64133, 64135, 64138, service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 330...... 63905 64739, 65102 333...... 63905 71 ...... 63489, 63623, 64909, To subscribe, go to http://hydra.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 335...... 63905 64910 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 534...... 63906 73...... 63433 the instructions. 591...... 63906 91...... 63888 930...... 63906 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 93...... 63294 6001...... 60139 respond to specific inquiries. 97...... 64139, 64141 Proposed Rules: 107...... 63474 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 890...... 64160 108...... 63474 Federal Register system to: [email protected] Proposed Rules: The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 7 CFR 39 ...... 63009, 63010, 63341, regulations. 301...... 63151 64925, 64928, 64931 Proposed Rules: 71...... 60162, 63517 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, DECEMBER 81...... 64918 93...... 64778 352...... 63005 60139–62906...... 3 1410...... 63339 15 CFR 62907–63148...... 4 801...... 63916, 63918 9 CFR 63149–63306...... 5 16 CFR 63307–63486...... 6 70...... 63588 63487–63620...... 7 78...... 63910 3...... 64142 88...... 63588 4...... 64142 63621–63904...... 10 94 ...... 62913, 63910, 63911 305...... 63749 63905–64094...... 11 Proposed Rules: 64095–64348...... 12 94...... 63633 17 CFR 64349–64734...... 13 Proposed Rules: 64735–64908...... 14 10 CFR 15...... 64383 64909–65090...... 17 20...... 64737 65091–65422...... 18 30...... 64737 18 CFR 32...... 64737 381...... 63162
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:46 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\18DECU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DECU ii Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001 / Reader Aids
19 CFR 33 CFR 63982, 64176, 64783 19...... 65370 60...... 64176 12...... 63490 100...... 63624 22...... 65370 62 ...... 63985, 64207, 64208 117 ...... 62935, 62936, 62938, 23...... 65351, 65370 63...... 65079 20 CFR 62939, 62940, 63626, 63627, 25...... 65349, 65370 80...... 60153, 65164 655...... 63298 65104 32...... 65353 89...... 65164 Proposed Rules: 165 ...... 60151, 62940, 64144, 39...... 65371 90...... 65164 404...... 63634 64912, 65105 42...... 65351 91...... 65164 44...... 65367 Proposed Rules: 21 CFR 300...... 64387 52 ...... 65349, 65353, 65367, 1...... 63640 1048...... 65164 510 ...... 63163, 63164, 63499 65370 147...... 63642 1051...... 65164 520...... 63165, 63166 53...... 65370 165...... 64778 1065...... 65164 524...... 63164 202...... 63334 175...... 63645 1068...... 65164 556...... 62916 181...... 63650 212...... 63335 558 ...... 62916, 63499, 63500 215...... 63334 42 CFR 217...... 63336 Proposed Rules: 34 CFR 411...... 60154 237...... 63335 500...... 63519 Proposed Rules: 1001...... 62980, 63749 242...... 63334 1310...... 64173 Ch. VI...... 63203 Proposed Rules: 24 CFR 37 CFR 43 CFR 235...... 63348 30...... 63436 201...... 62942, 63920 3600...... 63334 1823...... 64391 3610...... 63334 1836...... 64391 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 3620...... 63334 5...... 65162 255...... 64783 1852...... 64391 3800...... 63334 202...... 65162 38 CFR 49 CFR 26 CFR 44 CFR 17 ...... 63446, 63449, 64904 241...... 63942 1...... 63920 20...... 60152 64...... 63627 65...... 65107, 65110 571 ...... 60157, 64154, 64358, 301 ...... 64351, 64740, 64911 Proposed Rules: 67...... 65115, 65120 65376 602...... 64076, 64351 3...... 64174 572...... 64368 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 39 CFR 61...... 60176 Proposed Rules: 1 ...... 63203, 64385, 64904 107...... 63096 20...... 64353 301...... 64386 46 CFR 171...... 63096 602...... 64386 172...... 63096 40 CFR Proposed Rules: 173...... 63096 28 CFR 67...... 64784 8...... 63454 177...... 63096 Proposed Rules: 9...... 65256 47 CFR 178...... 63096 97...... 64934 52 ...... 63311, 63921, 64146, 180...... 63096 64148, 64750, 64751 1...... 62992 29 CFR 219...... 64000 62 ...... 63311, 63938, 64151, 25...... 63512 573 ...... 64078, 64087, 65165 578...... 63501 64152 54...... 64775 577...... 64078, 64087 579...... 63501 63...... 63313, 65072 73 ...... 60156, 60157, 63199, 580...... 63501 70 ...... 62945, 62946, 62949, 63629, 64776, 64777, 65122 4022...... 64744 62951, 62954, 62961, 62967, 76...... 62992 50 CFR 4044...... 64744 62969, 63166, 63168, 63170, 101...... 63512 17...... 62993, 63752 Proposed Rules: 63175, 63180, 63184, 63188, Proposed Rules: 230...... 64378 470...... 65163 63318, 63503 1...... 64785 600...... 63199 1910...... 64946 81...... 64751 2...... 64785 622...... 60161 1915...... 64946 122...... 65256 51...... 63651, 64946 635...... 63003, 64378 1926...... 64946 123...... 65256 73 ...... 63209, 63653, 63654, 648...... 63003 1928...... 64946 124...... 65256 63986, 63997, 64792, 65164 660...... 63199, 63630 125...... 65256 87...... 64785 679...... 64380, 64915 30 CFR 152...... 64759 Proposed Rules: 256...... 60147 156...... 64759 48 CFR 17...... 63349, 63654 918...... 64746 180...... 63192, 64768 Ch. 1...... 65346, 65372 20...... 63665 944...... 62917 261...... 60153, 62973 2 ...... 65349, 65351, 65353 21...... 63349, 63665 Proposed Rules: 271...... 63331 5...... 65370 222...... 64793 936...... 63968 300...... 64357 8...... 65367 223...... 64793 721...... 63941 11...... 65351 224...... 64793 31 CFR Proposed Rules: 12...... 65370 648 ...... 63013, 63666, 64392 211...... 63623 52 ...... 63204, 63343, 63972, 15 ...... 65351, 65368, 65369 679...... 65028
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:46 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\18DECU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DECU Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001 / Reader Aids iii
REMINDERS National priorities list cooperative agreements with update; comments due cooperative firms; policy The items in this list were COMMENTS DUE NEXT by 12-28-01; published clarification, process editorially compiled as an aid WEEK 11-28-01 [FR 01-29469] improvements, etc.; to Federal Register users. comments due by 12-28-01; Inclusion or exclusion from ENVIRONMENTAL AGRICULTURE published 10-29-01 [FR 01- this list has no legal PROTECTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT 26622] significance. Superfund program: Animal and Plant Health National oil and hazardous NUCLEAR REGULATORY Inspection Service substances contingency COMMISSION Plant-related quarantine, plan— Rulemaking petitions: RULES GOING INTO domestic: National priorities list Leyse, Robert H.; comments EFFECT DECEMBER 18, Citrus canker; comments update; comments due 2001 due by 12-26-01; due by 12-27-01; by 12-28-01; published published 10-12-01 [FR published 11-27-01 [FR 11-28-01 [FR 01-29470] 01-25672] 01-29473] DEFENSE DEPARTMENT FEDERAL Nuclear Energy Institute; COMMERCE DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATIONS comments due by 12-26- Federal Acquisition Regulation COMMISSION (FAR): National Oceanic and 01; published 10-11-01 Atmospheric Administration Radio stations; table of [FR 01-25565] Contractor personnel; assignments: information technology Fishery conservation and TRANSPORTATION management: North Carolina and South services procurement; Carolina; comments due DEPARTMENT published 12-18-01 Northeastern United States by 12-26-01; published Federal Aviation fisheries— Iceland; newly designated 11-20-00 [FR 00-29626] Administration country under Trade Summer flounder, scup, Television broadcasting: Airworthiness directives: Agreements Act; and black sea bass; Cable television systems— Bell; comments due by 12- published 12-18-01 comments due by 12- Horizontal and vertical 28-01; published 10-29-01 28-01; published 12-13- ownership limits and North American Industry [FR 01-26966] 01 [FR 01-30828] broadcast and MDS Classification System; TRANSPORTATION ENVIRONMENTAL attribution rules; published 12-18-01 DEPARTMENT PROTECTION AGENCY comments due by 12- Federal Aviation GENERAL SERVICES 26-01; published 10-11- Air quality implementation Administration ADMINISTRATION plans; approval and 01 [FR 01-25479] Airworthiness directives: Federal Acquisition Regulation promulgation; various FEDERAL RESERVE (FAR): States: SYSTEM Dassault; comments due by West Virginia; comments Risk-based capital: 12-26-01; published 11- Contractor personnel; 26-01 [FR 01-29342] information technology due by 12-27-01; Supplementary capital services procurement; published 11-27-01 [FR elements (tier 2 capital); TRANSPORTATION published 12-18-01 01-29471] deferred tax assets DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (Regulations H and Y); Federal Aviation Iceland; newly designated comments due by 12-27- Administration country under Trade PROTECTION AGENCY 01; published 11-27-01 Airworthiness directives: Agreements Act; Hazardous waste program [FR 01-29331] published 12-18-01 authorizations: Enstrom Helicopter Corp.; HEALTH AND HUMAN comments due by 12-28- North American Industry Utah; comments due by 12- SERVICES DEPARTMENT 01; published 10-29-01 Classification System; 26-01; published 11-26-01 Centers for Medicare & [FR 01-26965] published 12-18-01 [FR 01-28852] Medicaid Services ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS Medicare and Medicaid: PROTECTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT AND SPACE Fire safety standards for Federal Aviation ADMINISTRATION Hazardous waste program certain health care authorizations: facilities; comments due Administration Federal Acquisition Regulation Utah; comments due by 12- by 12-26-01; published Airworthiness directives: (FAR): 26-01; published 11-26-01 10-26-01 [FR 01-25422] Honeywell; comments due Contractor personnel; [FR 01-28851] Medicare: by 12-28-01; published information technology Radioactive waste disposal: Supplementary medical 10-29-01 [FR 01-26968] services procurement; Transuranic radioactive insurance premium Applications, hearings, published 12-18-01 waste characterization surcharge agreements; determinations, etc.: Iceland, newly designated program documents for comments due by 12-26- BAE Systems (Operations) country under Trade disposal at Waste 01; published 10-26-01 Ltd.; comments due by Agreements Act; Isolation Pilot Plant— [FR 01-27120] 12-28-01; published 11- INTERIOR DEPARTMENT published 12-18-01 Hanford Site, WA; 28-01 [FR 01-29599] Surface Mining Reclamation North American Industry comments due by 12- TRANSPORTATION and Enforcement Office Classification System; 27-01; published 11-27- DEPARTMENT published 12-18-01 01 [FR 01-29454] Permanent program and abandoned mine land Federal Highway TRANSPORTATION Savannah River Site, SC; reclamation plan Administration DEPARTMENT comments due by 12- submissions: Engineering and traffic 27-01; published 11-27- Illinois; comments due by operations: Federal Aviation 01 [FR 01-29455] Administration 12-27-01; published 11- Highway bridge replacement ENVIRONMENTAL 27-01 [FR 01-29452] and rehabilitation program; Airworthiness directives: PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS comments due by 12-26- McDonnell Douglas; Superfund program: AND SPACE 01; published 9-26-01 [FR published 11-13-01 National oil and hazardous ADMINISTRATION 01-24091] Rolls-Royce, plc; published substances contingency Grant and Cooperative National bridge inspection 11-13-01 plan— Agreement Handbook; standards; comments due
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:46 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\18DECU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DECU iv Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001 / Reader Aids
by 12-26-01; published 9- in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual Institute, and for other enacted public laws. To 26-01 [FR 01-24092] pamphlet) form from the purposes. (Dec. 14, 2001; 115 subscribe, go to http:// Superintendent of Documents, Stat. 814) hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ U.S. Government Printing LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS H.J. Res. 78/P.L. 107–83 publaws-l.html or send E-mail Office, Washington, DC 20402 Making further continuing to [email protected] (phone, 202–512–1808). The This is a continuing list of appropriations for the fiscal with the following text text will also be made public bills from the current year 2002, and for other message: session of Congress which available on the Internet from purposes. (Dec. 15, 2001; 115 GPO Access at http:// have become Federal laws. It Stat. 822) SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L may be used in conjunction www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ Last List December 14, 2001 Your Name. with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws nara005.html. Some laws may Update Service) on 202–523– not yet be available. Note: This service is strictly 6641. This list is also H.R. 2291/P.L. 107–82 available online at http:// Public Laws Electronic To extend the authorization of for E-mail notification of new www.nara.gov/fedreg/ Notification Service the Drug-Free Communities laws. The text of laws is not plawcurr.html. (PENS) Support Program for an available through this service. The text of laws is not additional 5 years, to PENS cannot respond to published in the Federal authorize a National PENS is a free electronic mail specific inquiries sent to this Register but may be ordered Community Antidrug Coalition notification service of newly address.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 23:46 Dec 17, 2001 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\18DECU.LOC pfrm01 PsN: 18DECU