Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 18547 

On March 24, 2011, the Commission 

held a drawing to determine priority 

among competing preliminary permit 

applications with identical filing times. 

In the event that the Commission 

concludes that none of the applicants’ 

plans are better adapted than the others 

to develop, conserve, and utilize in the 

public interest the water resources of 

the region at issue, the priority 

established by this drawing will serve as 

the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, 

the order of priority is as follows: 

Project No. 

1. FFP Missouri 16, LLC ............ 13753–000 

2. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund 

XLVII ....................................... 13743–000 

3. Solia 7 Hydroelectric, LLC ..... 13769–000 

4. Three Rivers Hydro LLC ........ 13785–000 

Dated: March 25, 2011. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7857 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Notice Announcing Filing Priority for 

Preliminary Permit Applications 

Project No. 

Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund 

XXXVII ..................................... 13738–000 

FFP Missouri 6, LLC .................. 13761-000 

Solia 1 Hydroelectric, LLC .......... 13770–000 

On March 24, 2011, the Commission 

held a drawing to determine priority 

among competing preliminary permit 

applications with identical filing times. 

In the event that the Commission 

concludes that none of the applicants’ 

plans are better adapted than the others 

to develop, conserve, and utilize in the 

public interest the water resources of 

the region at issue, the priority 

established by this drawing will serve as 

the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, 

the order of priority is as follows: 

Project No. 

1. FFP Missouri 6, LLC .............. 13761-000 

2. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund 

XXXVII ..................................... 13738-000 

3. Solia 1 Hydroelectric, LLC ..... 13770–000 

Dated: March 25, 2011. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7850 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Project No. 2524–018—Oklahoma] 

Grand River Dam Authority, Salina 

Pumped Storage Project; Notice of 

Proposed Restricted Service List for a 

Programmatic Agreement for 

Managing Properties Included in or 

Eligible for Inclusion in the National 

Register of Historic Places 

Rule 2010 of the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission’s (Commission) 

Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 

385.2010, provides that, to eliminate 

unnecessary expense or improve 

administrative efficiency, the Secretary 

may establish a restricted service list for 

a particular phase or issue in a 

proceeding. The restricted service list 

should contain the names of persons on 

the service list who, in the judgment of 

the decisional authority establishing the 

list, are active participants with respect 

to the phase or issue in the proceeding 

for which the list is established. 

The Commission staff is consulting 

with the Oklahoma Historical Society 

(Oklahoma SHPO) and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation 

(Advisory Council) pursuant to the 

Advisory Council’s regulations, 36 CFR 

part 800, implementing section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act, 

as amended, (16 U.S.C. 470f), to prepare 

a Programmatic Agreement for 

managing properties included in, or 

eligible for inclusion in, the National 

Register of Historic Places at the existing 

Salina Pumped Storage Project, located 

on the Saline Creek arm of Lake Hudson 

in Mayes County, Oklahoma. 

The Programmatic Agreement, when 

executed by the Commission, the 

Oklahoma SHPO, and the Advisory 

Council, would satisfy the 

Commission’s section 106 

responsibilities for all individual 

undertakings carried out in accordance 

with the license until the license expires 

or is terminated (36 CFR 800.13[e]). The 

Commission’s responsibilities pursuant 

to section 106 for the project would be 

fulfilled through the Programmatic 

Agreement, which the Commission staff 

proposes to draft in consultation with 

certain parties listed below. 

Grand River Dam Authority, as 

licensee for Project No. 2524–018, is 

invited to participate in consultations to 

develop the Programmatic Agreement 

and to sign as a concurring party to the 

Programmatic Agreement. For purposes 

of commenting on the Programmatic 

Agreement, we propose to restrict the 

service list for Project No. 2524–018 as 

follows: 

John Fowler, Executive Director, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, The Old Post Office Building, Suite 803, 1100 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004.

Frank Hecksher, Peoria Tribe of Oklahoma, 118 S. Eight Tribes Trail, 

Miami, OK 74354. 

Melvena Heisch, Deputy SHPO, Oklahoma Historical Society, 800 

Nazih Zuhdi Drive, Oklahoma, OK 73105–7917.

Ted Isham, Emman Spain, Muscogee (Creek) Nation, P.O. Box 580, 

Okmulgee, OK 74447. 

Dr. Robert Brooks, State Archaeologist, Oklahoma Archeological Survey, 111 E. Chesapeake Street, Norman, OK 73019.James Munkres, Osage Nation, 627 Grandview, Pawhuska, OK 74056. 

Dr. Darrell E. Townsend II, Grand River Dam Authority, P.O. Box 70, 

Langley, OK 74350–0070.

George Strack, THPO, Miami Tribe of Oklahoma, P.O. Box 1326, 

Miami, OK 74355. 

Charles Atkins, Grand River Dam Authority, P.O. Box 70, Langley, OK 

74350–0070.

Jodi Hayes, Shawnee Tribe, P.O. Box 189, Miami, OK 74355. 

Dr. Timothy G. Baugh, Historical, Archaeologist, Oklahoma Historical 

Society, 800 Nazih Zuhdi Drive, Oklahoma, OK 73105–7917.

Charles Coleman, Thlopthlocco Tribal Town, P.O. Box 188, Okemah, 

OK 74859–0188. 

Any person on the official service list 

for the above-captioned proceedings 

may request inclusion on the restricted 

service list, or may request that a 

restricted service list not be established, 

by filing a motion to that effect within 

15 days of this notice date. An original 

plus seven copies of any such motion 

must be filed with the Secretary of the 

Commission (888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426) and must be 

served on each person whose name 

appears on the official service list. If no 

such motions are filed, the restricted 

service list will be effective at the end 

of the 15 day period. Otherwise, a 

further notice will be issued ruling on 

the motion. 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
18548 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 

Dated: March 28, 2011. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7778 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9289–4] 

Clean Water Act Section 303(d): Final 

Agency Action on Three Total 

Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) in 

Louisiana 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces final 

agency action on three TMDLs prepared 

by EPA Region 6 for waters listed in 

Louisiana’s Mississippi River Basin, 

under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water 

Act (CWA). Documents from the 

administrative record file for the three 

TMDLs, including TMDL calculations 

and responses to comments, may be 

viewed at http://www.epa.gov/region6/ 

water/npdes/tmdl/index.htm. The 

administrative record file may be 

examined by calling or writing Ms. 

Diane Smith at the address below. 

Please contact Ms. Smith to schedule an 

inspection. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diane Smith, Environmental Protection 

Specialist, Water Quality Protection 

Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202–2733, (214) 

665–2145. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1996, 

two Louisiana environmental groups, 

the Sierra Club and Louisiana 

Environmental Action Network 

(plaintiffs), filed a lawsuit in Federal 

Court against the EPA, styled Sierra 

Club, et al. v. Clifford et al., No. 96– 

0527, (E.D. La.). Among other claims, 

plaintiffs alleged that EPA failed to 

establish Louisiana TMDLs in a timely 

manner. EPA established three of these 

TMDLs pursuant to a consent decree 

entered in this lawsuit. 

EPA Takes Final Agency Action on 

Three TMDLs 

By this notice EPA is taking final 

agency action on the following three 

TMDLs on waters located within the 

Louisiana Mississippi River Basin: 

Subsegment Waterbody name Pollutant 

070401 .............. Mississippi River Passes (estuarine) ....................................................................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070502 .............. Thompson Creek ..................................................................................................................................... Fecal Coliform. 

070503 .............. Capitol Lake ............................................................................................................................................. Fecal Coliform. 

EPA requested the public provide to 

EPA any significant water quality 

related data or information that might 

impact the three TMDLs in the Federal 

Register Notice: volume 75, number 37, 

page 8698 (February 25, 2010). The 

comments which were received, EPA’s 

response to comments, as well as the 

TMDLs may be found at http:// 

www.epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/ 

tmdl/index.htm. 

Dated: March 28, 2011. 

Miguel I. Flores, 

Director, Water Quality Protection Division, 

EPA Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7906 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9289–5] 

North Carolina Waters Along the Entire 

Length of Brunswick and Pender 

Counties and the Lower Portion of the 

Cape Fear River in Brunswick and New 

Hanover Counties; No Discharge Zone 

Determination 

On June 21, 2010, the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 4, 

published a proposal in concurrence 

with the North Carolina Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources 

(DENR), Division of Water Quality 

(DWQ), that adequate and reasonably 

available pumpout facilities exist for the 

designation of Brunswick and Pender 

Counties Coastal Waters and a portion 

of the Cape Fear River, as a No 

Discharge Zone (NDZ). Specifically, 

these waters include all the tidal salt 

waters extending 3 nautical miles (nm) 

into the Atlantic Ocean along the entire 

length of Brunswick and Pender 

Counties, and the saline waters of the 

Cape Fear River in Brunswick and New 

Hanover Counties. The other saline 

waters of New Hanover County have 

already been designated as a NDZ. 

The originally proposed geographic 

description including latitudes and 

longitudes were as follows: 

Northern Border of Pender County 

with Onslow County (34° 27′23.9′′ N 77° 

32.4′.859′′ W), southwest along the 

mainland coast, to include all named 

and unnamed creeks, the Atlantic 

Intracoastal Waterway, Cape Fear River 

(up to Toomers Creek 34° 15′36.61′′ N 

77° 58′56.03′′ W), Brunswick River, and 

Northeast Cape Fear River (up to Ness 

Creek 34° 17′7.10′′ N 77° 57′17.70′′ W), 

to the intersection of the Western tip of 

Brunswick County and South Carolina, 

3 nm into the Atlantic Ocean (33° 

48′32.903′′ N 78° 30′33.675′′ W) to 

include all the U.S. Territorial Sea 

extending 3 nm from South Carolina to 

a point 3 nm into the Atlantic Ocean 

(34° 24′30.972′′ N 78° 28′18.903′′ W) to 

the Pender/Onslow County Line. 

Three comment letters opposing this 

designation were received. These letters 

were from Cruise Lines International 

Association, Moran of Wilmington 

(Division of Moran Towing 

Corporation), and McAllister Towing 

and Transportation Company. The 

reason for the opposition is that there 

are not adequate and reasonably 

available pumpout facilities available 

for these commercial vessels which 

have deeper drafts than most 

recreational vessels. These are valid 

concerns. The State explored the 

comments and options, and confirmed 

that pumpout facilities are not available 

in the upper Cape Fear River 

specifically for the tugboats that operate 

in those waters and hereby amend the 

proposal to remove the Cape Fear River, 

above the waterway known as Snow’s 

Cut, from the NDZ area. The lower Cape 

Fear River is still proposed for NDZ. 

The inland limit of the NDZ in the Cape 

Fear River will be the waterway known 

as Snow’s Cut (A line drawn across the 

Cape Fear River at Snows Cut on the 

Cape Fear River at Snows Cut on the 

Cape Fear River from 34°3′5.8962′′ N; 

77°55′4.8966′′ W to 34°3′4.5216′′ N 

77°56′37.086′′ W). 

This petition was filed pursuant to the 

Clean Water Act, Section 312(f)(3), 

Public Law 92–500 as amended by 

Public Law 95–217 and Public Law 

100–4. A NDZ is defined as a body of 

water in which the discharge of vessel 

sewage, both treated and untreated, is 

prohibited. Section 312(f)(3) states: 

After the effective date of the initial 

standards and regulations promulgated 

under this section, if any State 

determines that the protection and 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES