38830 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 121 / Thursday, June 22, 2000 / Notices

ensure that the requirements of section

513 of the CWA will be applied to

publicly owned treatment works

receiving CWSRF assistance under those

agreements in the same manner as

section 513 requirements were applied

before October 1, 1994.

2. The grant condition will require

states to ensure that the requirements of

section 513 of the CWA, and no other

requirements identified in section

602(b)(6) of the CWA, will apply only to

publicly-owned treatment works that

are funded with funds ‘‘directly made

available by’’ grants under title VI of the

CWA, as that phrase is defined at 40

CFR 35.3105(g).

3. The grant condition will be

included in all capitalization grant

agreements entered into between EPA

and the states under title VI of the CWA

on or after January 1, 2001;

4. The Building Trades and EPA will

submit this agreement to the

Administrator of the Wage and Hour

Division, DOL, with a joint request to

dismiss the administrative proceeding

on the Building Trades Department’s

request for ruling.

5. The Building Trades will not

pursue any further action on the matter

hereby resolved in this settlement

agreement, either before DOL or any

other Federal administrative agency, or

in litigation.

6. In the event that EPA does not

accomplish one or more of the items

specified in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3

above, the Building Trades sole remedy

will be to reinstitute its request for

ruling before the DOL.

7. Nothing in the terms of this

agreement shall be construed to limit or

modify the discretion accorded EPA by

the CWA or by general principles of

administrative law.

8. The undersigned representatives of

each party certify that they are fully

authorized by the parties they represent

to bind the respective parties to the

terms of this settlement agreement. This

settlement agreement will be deemed to

be executed when it has been signed by

the representatives of the parties below.

Agreed:

Gary S. Guzy,

General Counsel, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C.

20460.

Edward C. Sullivan,

President, Building and Construction Trades

Department, AFL–CIO, American Federation

of Labor/Congress of Industrial

Organizations, 1155 Fifteenth Street, N.W.,

4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005–2707.

[FR Doc. 00–15719 Filed 6–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6721–1]

Notice of Availability of Letter From

EPA to the State of Wisconsin

Pursuant to Section 118 of the Clean

Water Act and the Water Quality

Guidance for the Great Lakes System

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of a

June 13, 2000 letter written from Region

5 of the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) to the State of Wisconsin

finding that certain provisions adopted

as part of the State’s water quality

standards and National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

permits program are inconsistent with

section 118(c) of the Clean Water Act

(CWA) and 40 CFR part 132. EPA’s

findings are described in the June 13,

2000 letter to Wisconsin. The letter also

expresses EPA’s belief that, with the

exceptions of those inconsistencies,

Wisconsin has otherwise adopted

requirements that are consistent with

the remainder of 40 CFR part 132. EPA

invites public comment on all aspects of

that letter, particularly on the findings

in the letter and on the course of action

that EPA proposes to take if the State

fails to adequately address EPA’s

findings.

DATES: Comments must be received in

writing by August 7, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on EPA’s

findings as described in the June 13,

2000 letter may be submitted to Mery

Jackson-Willis, Standards and Applied

Sciences Branch (WT–15J), Water

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604. In

the alternative, EPA will accept

comments electronically. Comments

should be sent to the following Internet

E-mail address: jacksonwillis.mery@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted in an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

EPA will print electronic comments in

hard-copy paper form for the official

administrative record. EPA will attempt

to clarify electronic comments if there is

an apparent error in transmission.

Comments provided electronically will

be considered timely if they are

submitted electronically by 11:59 p.m.

(Eastern time) August 7, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mery Jackson-Willis, Standards and

Applied Sciences Branch (WT–15J),

Water Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604, or telephone her at (312) 886–

3717.

Copies of the June 13, 2000 letter

described above is available upon

request by contacting Ms. JacksonWillis. That letter and materials

submitted by the State in support of its

submission that EPA relied upon in

preparing that letter (i.e., the docket) are

available for review by appointment at:

EPA, Region 5, 77 W Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois (telephone 312–886–

3717); and the Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources, 101 South Webster

Street, Madison, Wisconsin (telephone:

608–267–2621). To access the docket

material in Chicago, call Ms. Mery

Jackson-Willis at (312) 886–3717

between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (central

time) (Monday-Friday); in Wisconsin,

call Mr. Robert Masnado at (608) 267–

7662 between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.

(central time).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March

23, 1995, EPA published the Final

Water Quality Guidance for the Great

Lakes System (Guidance) pursuant to

section 118(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act,

33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(2). (March 23, 1995,

60 FR 15366). The Guidance, which was

codified at 40 CFR Part 132, requires the

Great Lakes States to adopt and submit

to EPA for approval water quality

criteria, methodologies, policies and

procedures that are consistent with the

Guidance. 40 CFR 132.4 & 132.5. EPA is

required to approve of the State’s

submission within 90 days or notify the

State that EPA has determined that all

or part of the submission is inconsistent

with the Clean Water Act or the

Guidance and identify any necessary

changes to obtain EPA approval. If the

State fails to make the necessary

changes within 90 days, EPA must

publish a notice in the Federal Register

identifying the approved and

disapproved elements of the submission

and a final rule identifying the

provisions of Part 132 that shall apply

for discharges within the State.

EPA reviewed the submittals from

Wisconsin for consistency with the

Guidance in accordance with 40 CFR

131 and 132.5. EPA determined that

certain parts of Wisconsin’s submittal

are inconsistent with the requirements

of the CWA or 40 CFR Part 132 and will

be subject to EPA disapproval if not

corrected. On June 13, 2000, in a letter

from EPA Region 5 to the Wisconsin

Department of Natural Resources, EPA

described in detail those provisions

determined to be inconsistent with the

Guidance and subject to disapproval if

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 121 / Thursday, June 22, 2000 / Notices 38831

not remedied by the State. The

inconsistencies relate to the following

components of the State’s submittal in

conformance with section 118(c) of the

CWA and 40 CFR Part 132: aquatic life

and human health criteria,

antidegradation, variances, total

maximum daily loads, the procedures

for evaluating the need for permit limits

on specific chemicals, the procedures

for evaluating the need for limits on

whole effluent toxicity, water quality

based effluent limits below the level of

quantification, and compliance

schedules. Based on our review to date,

EPA believes that, with the above

exceptions, the submittal by Wisconsin

is consistent with the Guidance. Today,

EPA is soliciting public comment

regarding all aspects of its June 13, 2000

letter. In particular, EPA solicits

comments on the provisions identified

in the June 13, 2000 letter as being

inconsistent with the CWA and the

Guidance, on EPA’s proposed course of

action if Wisconsin fails to remedy

those inconsistencies, and on EPA’s

belief that the remainder of Wisconsin’s

submittal is consistent with the

Guidance. EPA’s letter to Wisconsin

also describes the provisions of the

Guidance that EPA would identify in a

final rule as applying to discharges in

the Great Lakes Basin in Wisconsin if

the identified inconsistencies are not

addressed by the State. EPA may decide

to identify in such a rule the provisions

described in EPA’s letter to the State, or

other relevant provisions of the

Guidance that EPA determines upon

completion of this process to be

appropriate. EPA broadly solicits

comment regarding what provisions of

the Guidance would be appropriate for

EPA to identify in such a rule.

During the next 90 days, EPA intends

to continue working with Wisconsin to

address the inconsistencies identified in

the June 13, 2000 letter. If Wisconsin

fails to remedy any of the

inconsistencies identified in the letter,

EPA will publish a notice in the Federal

Register identifying the disapproved

elements and the corresponding

portions of Part 132 that will apply to

waters within the Great Lakes Basin in

Wisconsin.

Dated: June 13, 2000.

Francis X. Lyons,

Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 00–15830 Filed 6–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

[Report No. 2417]

Petitions for Reconsideration and

Clarification of Action in Rulemaking

Proceedings

June 15, 2000.

Petitions for Reconsideration and

Clarification have been filed in the

Commission’s rulemaking proceedings

listed in this Public Notice and

published pursuant to 47 CFR Section

1.429(e). The full text of this document

is available for viewing and copying in

Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street, S.W.,

Washington, DC or may be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

ITS, Inc. (202) 857–3800. Oppositions to

these petitions must be filed by July 7,

2000. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the

Commission’s rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).

Replies to an opposition must be filed

within 10 days after the time for filing

oppositions has expired.

Subject: Amendment of the

Commission’s Rules Regarding Multiple

Address Systems (WT Docket No. 97–

81).

Number of Petitions Filed: 3.

Subject: 1998 Biennial Regulatory

Review—Review of Depreciation

Requirements for Incumbent Local

Exchange Carriers (CC Docket No. 98–

137).

Number of Petitions File: 1.

Subject: Local Compensation and

Broadband Reporting (CC Docket No.

99–301).

Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–15705 Filed 6–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Report No. 2418; Petitions for

Reconsideration and Clarification of

Action in Rulemaking Proceeding

June 16, 2000.

Petitions for Reconsideration and

Clarification have been filed in the

Commission’s rulemaking proceeding

listed in this Public Notice and

published pursuant to 47 CFR Section

1.429(e). The full text of this document

is available for viewing and copying in

Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. or may be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

ITS Inc. (202) 857–3800. Oppositions to

these petitions must be filed by July 7,

2000 (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an

opposition must be filed within 10 days

after the time for filing oppositions has

expired.

Subject: Establishment of a class A

Television Service (MM Docket No. 00–

10).

Number of Petitions Filed: 15.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–15773 Filed 6–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–M

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices;

Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or

Bank Holding Companies

The notificants listed below have

applied under the Change in Bank

Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and

§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12

CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank

holding company. The factors that are

considered in acting on the notices are

set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12

U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for

immediate inspection at the Federal

Reserve Bank indicated. The notices

also will be available for inspection at

the offices of the Board of Governors.

Interested persons may express their

views in writing to the Reserve Bank

indicated for that notice or to the offices

of the Board of Governors. Comments

must be received not later than July 10,

2000.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (W.

Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200

North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201–

2272:

1. Charles Asher Rosebrough, III, and

Nancy King Rosebrough, both of

Graham, Texas; to retain voting shares

of First Graham Bancorp, Inc., Graham,

Texas, and thereby retain voting shares

of First National Bank, Graham, Texas.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, June 19, 2000.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00–15821 Filed 6–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Change in Bank Control Notices;

Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or

Bank Holding Companies

The notificants listed below have

applied under the Change in Bank

Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and

§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12