Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Notices 2291 

Enter the docket number (P–14311–000) 

in the docket number field to access the 

document. For assistance, contact FERC 

Online Support. 

Dated: January 9, 2012. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–688 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. RM98–1–000] 

Records Governing Off-the-Record 

Communications; Public Notice 

This constitutes notice, in accordance 

with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt 

of prohibited and exempt off-the-record 

communications. 

Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, 

September 22, 1999) requires 

Commission decisional employees, who 

make or receive a prohibited or exempt 

off-the-record communication relevant 

to the merits of a contested proceeding, 

to deliver to the Secretary of the 

Commission, a copy of the 

communication, if written, or a 

summary of the substance of any oral 

communication. 

Prohibited communications are 

included in a public, non-decisional file 

associated with, but not a part of, the 

decisional record of the proceeding. 

Unless the Commission determines that 

the prohibited communication and any 

responses thereto should become a part 

of the decisional record, the prohibited 

off-the-record communication will not 

be considered by the Commission in 

reaching its decision. Parties to a 

proceeding may seek the opportunity to 

respond to any facts or contentions 

made in a prohibited off-the-record 

communication, and may request that 

the Commission place the prohibited 

communication and responses thereto 

in the decisional record. The 

Commission will grant such a request 

only when it determines that fairness so 

requires. Any person identified below as 

having made a prohibited off-the-record 

communication shall serve the 

document on all parties listed on the 

official service list for the applicable 

proceeding in accordance with Rule 

2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. 

Exempt off-the-record 

communications are included in the 

decisional record of the proceeding, 

unless the communication was with a 

cooperating agency as described by 

40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 

385.2201(e)(1)(v). 

The following is a list of off-therecord communications recently 

received by the Secretary of the 

Commission. The communications 

listed are grouped by docket numbers in 

ascending order. These filings are 

available for review at the Commission 

in the Public Reference Room or may be 

viewed on the Commission’s Web site at 

http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary 

link. Enter the docket number, 

excluding the last three digits, in the 

docket number field to access the 

document. For assistance, please contact 

FERC, Online Support at FERCOnline

Support@ferc.gov or toll free at (866) 

208–3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 

502–8659. 

Docket No. Document 

dated Presenter or requester 

Prohibited: 

1. CP07–444–000 ......................................................................................................................... 11–18–11 Several Individuals.1

2. EC11–60–000 ........................................................................................................................... 12–17–11 Marshall Burkes. 

3. RM10–23–002 ........................................................................................................................... 12–22–11 Theodore J. Skerpon. 

Exempt: 

1. P–2503–147 .............................................................................................................................. 11–1–11 Commission Staff.2

2. CP11–515–000 ......................................................................................................................... 11–2–11 Janice and Kevin O’Keeffe 

3. CP11–515–000 ......................................................................................................................... 11–14–11 Commission Staff.3

4. DI10–9–000 ............................................................................................................................... 11–18–11 Hon. John Williamson, M.P. 

5. P–2277–023 .............................................................................................................................. 11–21–11 Commission Staff.4

6. CP11–56–000 ........................................................................................................................... 11–28–11 Commission Staff.5

7. CP11–161–000 ......................................................................................................................... 11–28–11 Commission Staff.6

8. P–13417–000 ............................................................................................................................ 12–5–11 Hon. Herb Kohl 

9. CP11–72–000 ........................................................................................................................... 12–9–11 Commission Staff.7

10. CP12–30–000 ......................................................................................................................... 12–15–11 Hon. Leonard Lance. 

11. P–14263–000 .......................................................................................................................... 12–16–11 Gov. Matthew H. Mead. 

12. CP11–14–000 ......................................................................................................................... 12–20–11 Commission Staff‘‘. 8

13. P–12632–002 .......................................................................................................................... 12–20–11 Hon. Troy Fraser. 

14. P–2188–000 ............................................................................................................................ 12–22–11 Hon. Max Baucus. 

1Form letters were submitted from 379 individuals over the period of 11/18 to 12/22. 

2Telephone record. 

3Telephone records and email exchanges that occurred on 11/14 and 11/29. 

4Telephone record. 

5Telephone record from three occurrences—11/28, 12/7 and 12/20. 

6Telephone record. 

7Telephone record from two occurrences—12/9 and 12/13. 

8Email exchanges that occurred on 12/20 and 12/27. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2292 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 17, 2012 / Notices 

Dated: January 10, 2012. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–692 Filed 1–13–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9618–6] 

Request for Nominations for Peer 

Reviewers for the Draft Research 

Report Entitled, ‘‘Investigation of 

Ground Water Contamination Near 

Pavillion, WY ’’ 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) invites public 

nominations of scientific experts to be 

considered as peer reviewers for the 

external review of the draft research 

report entitled, ‘‘Investigation of Ground 

Water Contamination near Pavillion, 

Wyoming.’’ The draft research report 

was prepared by the National Risk 

Management Research Laboratory 

(NRMRL), within the EPA Office of 

Research and Development (ORD), and 

by EPA Region 8. EPA released the draft 

report for public comment on December 

14, 2011 (see Federal Register Vol. 76, 

No. 240 at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

pkg/FR-2011-12-14/pdf/FR-2011-12- 

14.pdf). This draft report is not final as 

described in EPA’s Information Quality 

Guidelines, and it does not represent 

and should not be construed to 

represent final Agency policy or views. 

Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), 

an EPA contractor for external peer 

review, will organize and conduct the 

external peer review. Nominees must 

have expertise in the areas described 

under ‘‘Expertise Sought’’ below, be free 

of any conflict of interest, and be 

available to participate in a one- to twoday peer review meeting that will take 

place in March or April, 2012 (exact 

date to be determined based on reviewer 

availability). ERG will consider and 

screen all nominated candidates against 

the selection criteria described under 

‘‘Reviewer Selection’’ below. A second 

Federal Register notice will be 

published about one month prior to the 

external peer review meeting to provide 

the meeting date, location, and 

registration information. Additional 

details about the peer review process 

can be found at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/ 

si_public_pr_agenda.cfm. 

The public comment period for 

‘‘Investigation of Ground Water 

Contamination near Pavillion, 

Wyoming’’ began December 14, 2011, 

and ends January 27, 2012. Peer 

reviewers will be provided with all 

public comments for their consideration 

as they review the research report. 

DATES: Nominations for scientific peer 

review should be submitted via email as 

soon as they are available, but no later 

than February 17, 2012. Nominations 

should consist of the nominee’s full 

name and their current email address or 

other contact information. 

ADDRESSES: Peer reviewer nominations 

(including full name, email, and if 

available phone number) should be sent 

to peerreview@erg.com via email 

(preferred) or via facsimile at (781) 674– 

2906, Attn: Pavillion Peer Review. 

Background: Pavillion, Wyoming is 

located in Fremont County, about 20 

miles northwest of Riverton. The 

concern at the site is potential ground 

water contamination, based on resident 

complaints about smells, tastes, and 

adverse changes in water quality of their 

domestic wells. ORD and Region 8 have 

been collaborating to conduct a ground 

water investigation to better understand 

the basic ground water hydrology and 

how the constituents of concern may be 

occurring in the aquifer. A draft 

research report entitled ‘‘Investigation of 

Ground Water Contamination near 

Pavillion, Wyoming’’ was released on 

December 8, 2011. Prior to the release of 

the draft report, a public meeting was 

held November 9, 2011, to discuss 

findings and interpretations of data from 

the Pavillion site. The draft report and 

further information can be found at 

http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/

wy/pavillion/. 

Expertise Sought: EPA is seeking 

candidates who are nationally and/or 

internationally recognized scientists 

and/or engineers, who can conduct a 

scientifically thorough and unbiased 

review of the document. Any qualified 

person may be nominated to be 

considered for this peer review. 

Individuals may self-nominate. 

Candidates must have a medium to 

high degree of experience and expertise 

(and numerous publications, research 

projects, or field experience) in one or 

more of the following areas: 

—Petroleum Engineering (Natural gas, 

oil). 

—Petroleum Geology (Particularly in 

hydraulic fracturing and well-testing 

mechanical integrity). 

—Hydrology/hydrogeology (In or near 

drilling areas). 

—Geophysics, Environmental 

Engineering (As related to drilling and 

its effects). 

—Water Quality (Studies of 

contaminated ground water, etc.). 

—Organic/Inorganic Chemistry and 

Geochemistry (Chemical fate and 

transport, oxidation/reduction 

reactions, hydraulic fracturing 

chemistry and/or gas-liquid exchange 

and solubility). 

—Conducting laboratory and/or field 

research on physical and 

biogeochemical processes in 

subsurface environments. 

—Conducting computer-based research 

on physical and biogeochemical 

processes in subsurface environments. 

—Conducting laboratory and/or fieldbased research in hydraulic 

fracturing. 

—Conducting peer reviews of scientific 

and/or technical research studies and 

results for scientific/technical journal 

publications. 

Reviewer Selection: ERG will contact 

each nominee via email to request that 

they send to ERG a copy of their CV, fill 

out a calendar of availability, complete 

a detailed conflict-of-interest form, and 

fill out an expertise form. ERG will 

carefully consider all candidates 

nominated through this process and will 

conduct a parallel search for experts to 

assemble as broad a pool of initial 

candidates as possible. ERG will then 

screen all candidates against the criteria 

listed below to determine their 

suitability as peer reviewers. From 

among candidates who most strongly 

meet the selection criteria, ERG will 

select a final set of five to seven 

reviewers who, collectively, best 

provide expertise spanning the multiple 

areas listed above and, to the extent 

feasible, best provide a balance of 

perspectives. 

Selection Criteria 

—Demonstrated scientific credentials 

and disciplinary expertise in their 

field including: 

Æ Scientific credentials equivalent to 

a Ph.D. or P.E., Sc.D 

Æ Authorship on original publications 

and/or reviews in peer-reviewed 

scientific journals. 

Æ Significant professional 

accomplishments and recognition 

by professional societies. 

—Absence of financial conflicts of 

interest. 

—Absence of an appearance of lack of 

impartiality. 

—Willingness and availability to 

commit time to the scientific peer 

review and to meet all required 

deadlines. 

—Background experiences that would 

contribute to the diversity of 

perspectives of the peer reviewers. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES