Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 219 / Monday, November 13, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 67651

3. Appendix F of part 132 is amended

by adding procedure 3.C to read as

follows:

Appendix F of Part 132—Great Lakes

Water Quality Initiative

Implementation Procedures

* * * * *

Procedure 3: * * *

C. Mixing Zones for Bioaccumulative

Chemicals of Concern (BCCs). The following

requirements shall be applied in establishing

TMDLs, WLAs in the absence of TMDLs, and

preliminary WLAs for purposes of

determining the need for WQBELs under

procedure 5 of appendix F, for BCCs:

1. There shall be no mixing zones available

for new discharges of BCCs to the Great Lakes

System. WLAs established through TMDLs,

WLAs in the absence of TMDLs, and

preliminary WLAs for purposes of

determining the need for WQBELs for new

discharges of BCCs shall be set no higher

than the most stringent applicable water

quality criteria or values for the BCCs in

question. This prohibition takes effect for a

Great Lakes State or Tribe on the date EPA

approves the State’s or Tribe’s submission of

such prohibition or publishes a notice under

40 CFR 132.5(f) identifying that prohibition

as applying to discharges within the State or

Federal Tribal reservation.

2. For purposes of section C of procedure

3 of appendix F, new discharges are defined

as: (1) A ‘‘discharge of pollutants’’ (as defined

in 40 CFR 122.2) to the Great Lakes System

from a building, structure, facility, or

installation, the construction of which

commences after the date the prohibition in

section C.1 takes effect in that State or Tribe;

(2) a new discharge from an existing Great

Lakes discharger that commences after the

date the prohibition in section C.1 takes

effect in that State or Tribe; or (3) an

expanded discharge from an existing Great

Lakes discharger that commences after the

date the prohibition in section C.1 takes

effect in that State or Tribe, except for those

expanded discharges resulting from changes

in loadings of any BCC within the existing

capacity and processes (e.g., normal

operational variability, changes in intake

water pollutants, increasing the production

hours of the facility or adding additional

shifts, or increasing the rate of production),

and that are covered by the existing

applicable control document. Not included

within the definition of ‘‘new discharge’’ are

new or expanded discharges of BCCs from a

publicly owned treatment works (POTW as

defined at 40 CFR 122.2) when such

discharges are necessary to prevent a public

health threat to the community (e.g., a

situation where a community with failing

septic systems is connected to a POTW to

avert a potential public health threat from

these failing systems). These and all other

discharges of BCCs are defined as existing

discharges.

3. Up until November 15, 2010, mixing

zones for BCCs may be allowed for existing

discharges to the Great Lakes System

pursuant to the procedures specified in

sections D and E of this procedure.

4. Except as provided in sections C.5 and

C.6 of this procedure, permits issued on or

after this provision takes effect in a Great

Lakes State or Tribe shall not authorize

mixing zones for existing discharges of BCCs

to the Great Lakes System after November 15,

2010. After November 15, 2010, WLAs

established through TMDLs, WLAs

established in the absence of TMDLs, and

preliminary WLAs for purposes of

determining the need for WQBELs under

procedure 5 of appendix F for existing

discharges of BCCs to the Great Lakes System

shall be equal to the most stringent

applicable water quality criteria or values for

the BCCs in question.

5. Exception for Water Conservation. Great

Lakes States and Tribes may grant mixing

zones for any existing discharge of BCCs to

the Great Lakes System beyond the date

specified in section C.4 of this procedure

where it can be demonstrated, on a case-bycase basis, that failure to grant a mixing zone

would preclude water conservation measures

that would lead to overall load reductions in

BCCs, even though higher concentrations of

BCCs occur in the effluent. Such mixing

zones must also be consistent with sections

D and E of this procedure.

6. Exception for Technical and Economic

Considerations. Great Lakes States and Tribes

may grant mixing zones beyond the date

specified in section C.4 of this procedure for

any existing discharge of a BCC to the Great

Lakes System upon the request of a

discharger, subject to sections C.6.a through

C.6.c below.

a. The State or Tribe must determine that:

i. The discharger is in compliance with and

will continue to implement, for the BCC in

question, all applicable requirements of

Clean Water Act sections 118, 301, 302, 303,

304, 306, 307, 401, and 402, including

existing National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) water-quality

based effluent limitations; and

ii. The discharger has reduced and will

continue to reduce the loading of the BCC for

which a mixing zone is requested to the

maximum extent possible, such that any

additional controls or pollution prevention

measures to reduce or ultimately eliminate

the BCC discharge would result in

unreasonable economic effects on the

discharger or the affected community

because the controls or measures are not

feasible or cost-effective.

b. Any mixing zone established pursuant to

this section shall:

i. Not result in any less stringent

limitations than those existing prior to

November 13, 2000;

ii. Be no larger than necessary to account

for the technical constraints and economic

effects identified pursuant to paragraph

C.6.a.ii above;

iii. Meet all applicable acute and chronic

aquatic life, wildlife and human health

criteria and values within and at the edge of

the mixing zone or be consistent with the

applicable TMDL or assessment and

remediation plan authorized under

procedure 3.A.

iv. Be accompanied, as appropriate, by a

permit condition requiring the discharger to

implement an ambient monitoring plan to

ensure compliance with water quality

standards and consistency with any

applicable TMDL or such other strategy

consistent with Section A of this procedure,

including the evaluation of alternative means

for reducing the BCC from other sources in

the watershed; and

v. Be limited to one permit term unless the

permitting authority makes a new

determination in accordance with this

section for each successive permit

application in which a mixing zone for the

BCC is sought.

c. For each draft NPDES permit that would

allow a mixing zone for one or more BCCs

after November 15, 2010, the fact sheet or

statement of basis for the draft permit that is

required to be made available through public

notice under 40 CFR 124.6(e) shall:

i. Specify the mixing provisions used in

calculating the permit limits; and

ii. Identify each BCC for which a mixing

zone is proposed.

7. Any mixing zone authorized under

sections C.3, C.5 or C.6 must be consistent

with sections D and E of this procedure, as

applicable.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–28709 Filed 11–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 63

[IB Docket No. 97–142, FCC 00–339]

Rules and Policies on Foreign

Participation in the U.S.

Telecommunications Market

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of

effective date.

SUMMARY: This document announces the

effective date of rules. The Commission

amended its rules regarding the prior

notifications of foreign affiliations, and

the rules contained information

collection requirements. These rules

become effective on November 9, 2000.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The amendments to 47

CFR 63.11 published at 65 FR 60113,

October 10, 2000, become effective on

November 9, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Reitzel, Telecommunications

Division, International Bureau, (202)

418–1499.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

September 12, 2000, the Commission

adopted an order clarifying and revising

rules regarding prior notifications of

foreign affiliations, a summary of which

was published in the Federal Register.

See 65 FR 60113, October 10, 2000.

Section 63.11 of the rules contained

67652 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 219 / Monday, November 13, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

information collection requirements. We

stated that § 63.11 contained

‘‘information collections that have not

been approved by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB). The

Commission will publish a document in

the Federal Register announcing the

effective date of that section.’’ The

information collections were approved

by OMB on October 23, 2000. See OMB

No. 3060–0686. This publication

satisfies our statement that the

Commission would publish a document

announcing the effective date of the

rules.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 63

Communications common carriers,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00–28887 Filed 11–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00–2424; MM Docket No. 00–88; RM–

9871]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Dillsboro and Rosman, NC

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the

request of Sutton Radiocasting

Corporation, allots Channel 237A to

Dillsboro, NC, as the community’s first

local aural service. See 65 FR 34997,

June 1, 2000. Channel 237A can be

allotted to Dillsboro in compliance with

the Commission’s minimum distance

separation requirements with a site

restriction of 14.5 kilometers (9 miles)

southeast, at coordinates 35–15–56 NL;

83–09–16 WL, to avoid a short-spacing

to Stations WIKQ, Channel 235C,

Greeneville, TN, and WYFC, Channel

237A, Clinton, TN. The counterproposal

of Chase Broadcasting, Inc. to allot

Channel 237A to Rosman, NC, as its first

local aural service, is dismissed. A filing

window for Channel 237A at Dillsboro

will not be opened at this time. Instead,

the issue of opening a filing window for

this channel will be addressed by the

Commission in a subsequent order.

DATES: Effective December 11, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau,

(202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 00–88,

adopted October 10, 2000, and released

October 27, 2000. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 445 12th Street,

SW., Washington, DC. The complete

text of this decision may also be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Services, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231

20th Street, NW., Washington, DC

20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

47 CFR PART 73—RADIO

BROADCAST SERVICES

1. The authority citation for Part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under North Carolina, is

amended by adding Dillsboro, Channel

237A.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 00–28889 Filed 11–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 00–2429; MM Docket No. 98–74; RM–

9269, RM–9736]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Eatonville, Wenatchee, Moses Lake,

Spokane, and Newport, WA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the

request of joint filers Barbara J.

Geesman, licensee of Station KKBY–FM,

Eatonville, Washington, Morris

Communications, successor to Pioneer

Broadcasting Company, Inc, licensee of

Stations KKRV and KWIQ, Upper

Columbia Media Association, licensee

of Station KEEH, Spokane, Washington,

James and Helen Stargel, licensee of

Station KMJY, Newport, Washington,

and Jeffrey Aaron Bruton, makes the

following amendments to the FM Table

of Allotments. (1) Channel 284C2 is

substituted for Channel 285C2 at

Wenatchee, Washington, and Station

KKRV’s license is modified at its

present site 10.2 kilometers (6.3 miles)

northeast of the community at

coordinates 47–28–44 NL and 120–12–

49 WL. (2) Channel 285C3 is substituted

for Channel 285A at Eatonville,

Washington, and Station KFNK’s license

is modified at its present site 6.4

kilometers (4 miles) southeast of the

community at coordinates 46–50–19 NL

and 122–11–53 WL. (3) Channel 262C is

substituted for Channel 262C1 at Moses

Lake, Washington, and Station KWIQ’s

license is modified at its present site

42.1 kilometers (26.2 miles) north of the

community at coordinates 47–29–20 NL

and 119–26–45 WL. (4) Channel 285C2

is substituted for Channel 284A at

Spokane, Washington, and Station

KEEH’s license is modified at its present

site 13.1 kilometers (8.2 miles) southeast

of the community at coordinates 47–34–

45 NL and 117–17–48 WL. (5) Channel

283C3 is substituted for Channel 285A

at Newport, Washington, and Station

KMJY’s license is modified at its present

site 2.2 kilometers (1.4 miles) southeast

of the community at coordinates 48–09–

37 NL and 117–01–49 WL. See

Supplementary Information.

DATES: Effective December 11, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Victoria M. McCauley, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 98–74,

adopted October 18, 2000, and released

October 27, 2000. The full text of this

Commission decision is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 445 12th Street,

SW., Washington, DC. The complete

text of this decision may also be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Services, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231

20th Street, NW., Washington, DC

20036.

Since Eatonville, Wenatchee, Moses

Lake, Spokane and Newport are within

320 kilometers (200 miles) of the U.S.-

Canadian border, we have requested

concurrence of the Canadian

government for the allotments at those

communities. Concurrence has been

received for Eatonville, Moses Lake,

Spokane and Newport. Concurrence for

the allotment at Wenatchee has been

requested but not yet received. Any

construction permit for Channel 284C2

at Wenatchee that is granted prior to the