33110 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Notices

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection in the Public Reference

Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16223 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. RP96–280–000]

Tuscarora Gas Transmission

Company; Notice of Proposed

Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

June 20, 1996.

Take notice that on June 18, 1996,

Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company

(Tuscarora) tendered for filing as part of

its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume

No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to

become effective August 1, 1996:

First Revised Sheet Nos. 4 & 5

First Revised Sheet No. 31

Original Sheet Nos. 91–93.

Tuscarora states that the tariff sheets

which it is submitting reflect a Gas

Research Institute Adjustment

Provision.

Tuscarora further states it has served

a copy of this filing upon all interested

state regulatory agencies and

Tuscarora’s jurisdictional customers.

Any person desiring to be heard or

protest said filing should file a motion

to intervene or protest with the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426, in accordance with Sections

385.214 and 385.211 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure. All such motions or protests

must be filed as provided in Section

154.210 of the Commission’s

Regulations. Protests will be considered

by the Commission in determining the

appropriate action to be taken, but will

not serve to make protestants parties to

the proceeding. Any person wishing to

become a party must file a motion to

intervene. Copies of this filing are on

file with the Commission and are

available for public inspection in the

Public Reference Room.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc.96–16227 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

[Docket No. CP96–533–000, et al.]

Petal Gas Storage Company, et al.;

Natural Gas Certificate Filings

June 18, 1996.

Take notice that the following filings

have been made with the Commission:

1. Petal Gas Storage Company

[Docket No. CP96–533–000]

Take notice that on May 22, 1996, as

supplemented on June 11, 1996, Petal

Gas Storage Company (Petal), Fairlane

Plaza South, 330 Town Center Drive,

Dearborn, Michigan 48126–2712, filed

in Docket No. CP96–533–000 a request

pursuant to Sections 157.205 and

157.212 of the Commission’s

Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(18 CFR 157.205 and 157.212) for

authorization to construct and operate a

new delivery point adjacent to Petal’s

natural gas storage facilities in Forrest

County, Mississippi and to acquire,

construct and operate appurtenant

facilities to accommodate natural gas

deliveries for the account of NorAm

Energy Services, Inc. (NorAm), under

the blanket certificate issued in Docket

No. CP95–14–000, pursuant to Section

7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, all as more

fully set forth in the request which is on

file with the Commission and open to

public inspection.

Petal asserts that the proposed

delivery point will permit Petal to

accommodate natural gas deliveries on

an interruptible basis, pursuant to a

presently-effective storage service

agreement between Petal and NorAm.

Petal states that the proposed delivery

point would be located approximately

one-half mile north of Petal’s storage

field, which is north of the town of

Petal, Mississippi, and would permit the

delivery for NorAm or other customers

to Hattiesburg Gas Storage Company

(Hattiesburg), a Hinshaw pipeline that is

subject to the jurisdiction of the

Mississippi Public Service Commission.

Petal states that presently, natural gas

stored in its facilities can only be

delivered to or received from Tennessee

Gas Pipeline Company and Koch

Gateway Pipeline Company. The

proposed new delivery point would

permit Petal to deliver gas from

NorAm’s Petal storage account to

Hattiesburg for storage in Hattiesburg’s

facilities, or to receive gas from

Hattiesburg for NorAm’s account for

storage in Petal’s facilities. Additionally,

Hattiesburg’s connection with

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line

Corporation and AIM Pipeline Company

could also provide NorAm with access

to additional interstate and intrastate

markets. Petal notes that the new

delivery point would also be available

for use by other customers.

The delivery point facilities will

consist of (1) approximately 2,600 feet

of an existing 8-inch pipeline to be

acquired by Petal from its parent

company, CMS Gas Transmission and

Storage Company; (2) 300 feet of 12-inch

pipeline extending to the Hattiesburg

Industrial Gas Sales Company with

associated 12-inch control valves and

1,800 feet of 12-inch pipeline

connecting the 8-inch pipeline to the

Petal facilities, including 8-inch control

and manual valves, flanges, studs, nuts,

etc. and 12-inch by 8-inch reducers; and

(3) a metering station 300 feet from the

interconnection with Hattiesburg at the

terminus of the 8-inch pipeline. Petal

estimates that the maximum allowable

operating pressure of the delivery point

facilities will be 1135 psig, and the

facilities will be capable of

accommodating the bidirectional flow of

up to 100,000 MMBtu/d. Petal estimates

that it will deliver approximately 25,000

MMBtu/d on a peak-day basis and

approximately 500,000 MMBtu annually

at the proposed delivery point on an

interruptible basis.

Petal estimates that the total cost of

the proposed construction will be

$450,000. Petal notes that it has been

authorized by the Commission to charge

market-based rates, and therefore it will

bear the cost of the proposed facilities

exclusively. Petal states that the total

volumes of gas to be delivered to

NorAm after the proposed delivery

point has been installed will not exceed

the total volumes presently authorized

and the installation of the proposed

delivery point is not prohibited by its

FERC Gas Tariff. Petal notes that the

delivery point will not affect its

certificated peak-day and annual

deliveries, because it does not propose

an increase in certificated firm capacity.

Petal claims that the new delivery point

should permit increased utilization of

its storage facilities on a peak-day and

year-round basis. Petal asserts that it has

sufficient capacity to accomplish

deliveries for NorAm at the proposed

delivery point without detriment or

disadvantage to its other customers.

Comment date: August 2, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph G

at the end of this notice.

2. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

[Docket Nos. CP89–629–032 and CP90–639–

020]

Take notice that on June 7, 1996,

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company

(Tennessee), 1010 Milam Street,

Houston, Texas 77252 filed a petition to

amend the authorizations previously

granted in this proceeding, pursuant to
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Notices 33111

section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA) and Part 157 of the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission’s

(Commission) regulations, to

accommodate a request by one shipper

to add two delivery points, at which

service would be provided only on a

secondary basis.

Tennessee states that on October 9,

1991, the Commission issued Tennessee

a certificate of public convenience and

necessity authorizing Tennessee, among

other things, to provide firm

transportation services to New England

Power Company (NEPCO). Tennessee

states that NEPCO has requested two

delivery points to increase its

operational flexibility and ability to

offload gas in response to its shifting gas

needs. Tennessee states that it is willing

to grant such request, subject to the

receipt of satisfactory regulatory

approvals.

Comment date: July 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

3. ANR Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP96–563–000]

Take notice that on June 10, 1996,

ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 500

Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan

48243, filed in Docket No. CP96–563–

000 a request pursuant to Sections

157.205 and 157.212 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.212) for authorization to modify and

operate an existing interconnection

between ANR and Central Illinois Light

Company (CILCO) for delivery of

natural gas to CILCO in Bureau County,

Illinois under ANR’s blanket certificate

issued in Docket No. CP82–480–000

pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas

Act, all as more fully set forth in the

request that is on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

ANR proposes to add a 6-inch turbine

meter at the Princeton Interconnection

for operational flexibility. This

additional 6-inch meter run will allow

ANR to inspect, maintain, or make

repairs to the meters without shutting

down this interconnection and

interrupting service to CILCO. The total

cost of the proposed facility is

approximately $70,600. Because ANR is

installing this facility for operational

flexibility, the proposed quantities of

natural gas to be delivered at Princeton

Interconnection will be unaffected by

the installation of the 6-inch meter.

ANR states that the proposed

modification is not prohibited by its

existing tariff and that it has sufficient

capacity to accomplish deliveries

without detriment or disadvantage to

other customers. The proposed

modification will not have an effect on

CIG’s peak day and annual deliveries

and the total volumes delivered will not

exceed total volumes authorized prior to

this request.

Comment date: August 2, 1996, in

accordance with Standard paragraph G

at the end of this notice.

4. Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd.

[Docket No. CP96–565–000]

Take notice that on June 11, 1996,

Young Gas Storage Company, Ltd.

(Young), P.O. Box 1087, Colorado

Springs, Colorado 80944, filed an

abbreviated application in Docket No.

CP96–565–000, pursuant to Section 7(b)

of the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of

the Commission’s regulations, for

authorization to abandon and remove a

single bi-directional meter station that

was constructed by Young to move gas

belonging to the Public Service

Company of Colorado (PSCo) to and

from Young’s underground gas storage

field (the Young Storage Field) in

Morgan County Colorado, all as more

fully set forth in the application, which

is on file with the Commission and open

to public inspection.

Young is a limited partnership, which

consists of two general partners (Young

Gas Storage Company and CIG Gas

Storage Company) and one limited

partner (the city of Colorado Springs,

Colorado, a municipal corporation of

the State of Colorado). According to

Young, PSCo indirectly owns a 47.5

percent interest in Young through a

PSCo subsidiary, and has contracted for

up to 180,000 Mcfd of storage capacity

from the Young Storage Field.

Young proposes to abandon and

remove the bi-directional meter station

and sell the salvageable materials to

Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG).

PSCo has agreed to and supports

Young’s proposal to abandon and

remove the subject facilities, stating that

it no longer expects to need this receipt

and delivery meter station. CIG, under

a May 31, 1996 Facilities Sales

Agreement with Young, has agreed to

purchase the salvaged meter station

materials for $234,317. According to

Young, the March 31, 1996 net book

value of these facilities was $591,355.

Young commenced storage service

operations from the Young Storage Field

on June 1, 1995. CIG operates the

storage field. Two CIG pipelines (a 16-

inch diameter line and a 24-inch

diameter line) connect the Young

Storage Field to CIG’s pipeline system.

These pipelines also connect CIG’s Fort

Morgan Storage Field facility to CIG’s

main terminal facility at Watkins

Station. According to Young, it

constructed the subject meter station as

part of the Young Storage Field

connection to CIG’s 16-inch line,

pursuant to Young’s original

negotiations with PSCo and CIG. As

proposed, this meter station was to be

used solely for PSCo, and PSCo was to

construct facilities to connect directly to

the CIG 16-inch line. Young states that,

as the parties continued to negotiate, a

more economical means of providing

transportation service to PSCo emerged,

which allowed PSCo to avoid

constructing facilities to connect to

CIG’s 16-inch line, and which did not

require the use of the subject meter

station facilities at the 16-inch line.

Young states that its other existing

meter station, at CIG’s 24-inch line, has

sufficient capacity to measure all of

Young’s volumes.

Comment date: July 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

5. Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line

Company

[Docket No. CP96–567–000]

Take notice that on June 12, 1996,

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company

(Panhandle), P.O. Box 1642, Houston,

Texas 77251–1642, filed in Docket No.

CP96–567–000 an application pursuant

to Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA), for permission and approval to

abandon, by sale to Equity Gas Systems,

Inc. (Equity) certain certificated

gathering facilities located in Woods

County, Oklahoma, all as more fully set

forth in the application on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

It is stated that the facilities proposed

to be abandoned herein, were

constructed for the purpose of gathering

long-term gas supplies for Panhandle’s

system supply obligations to sales

customers as certificated by the

Commission over the years. Panhandle

states that since its restructuring of

services under Order No. 636, that it no

longer has certificated sales obligations,

and thereby Panhandle indicates that it

no longer requires the minor gathering

facilities proposed to be abandoned in

this proceeding, to maintain its system

supply for sales customers. It is

indicated that Equity will operate the

acquired facilities in conjunction with

its gathering activities and that Equity

will continue to provide gathering

service for the connected gas wells.

Specifically, Panhandle is proposing

to abandon approximately 11.83 miles

of pipeline, ranging from 2-inches to 6-

inches in length together with related

rights-of-way, easements, permits and

property interests, as well a nine

measuring stations and eleven well
33112 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Notices

connections. Panhandle states that it

intends to sell the facilities to Equity for

$301,000.

Comment date: July 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

6. ANR Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP96–571–000]

Take notice that on June 13, 1996,

ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 500

Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan

48243, filed in Docket No. CP96–571–

000 an application pursuant to Section

7(c) of the Natural Gas Act for

authorization to utilize a temporary

workspace and any other authorization

deemed necessary associated with a

pipeline replacement project in Bolivar

County, Mississippi, all as more fully

set forth in the application on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

In replacing two of the lines within

approximately a 1.0 mile segment of its

Southeast Mainline, ANR propose to use

work areas which may not have been

included in the scope of the

authorizations for the facilities when

they were originally certificated and

constructed.

Comment date: July 9, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

7. Koch Gateway Pipeline Company

[Docket No. CP96–572–000]

Take notice that on June 14, 1996,

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company (Koch

Gateway), P.O. Box 1478, Houston,

Texas 77251–1478, filed in Docket No.

CP96–572–000 an application, pursuant

to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act,

for a certificate of public convenience

and necessity for authorization to

construct and operate approximately 16

miles of 30-inch pipeline in

Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana to attach

gas reserves in the deep offshore areas

to its Bastian Bay Line, and for

permission to roll in the costs

attributable to those facilities, all as

more fully set forth in the application,

which is on file with the Commission

and open for public inspection.

Koch Gateway states that it would

construct and operate the pipeline from

an interconnect with the Warren Venice

Processing Plant westward to an

interconnection with Koch Gateway’s

existing Bastian Bay Line. Koch

Gateway indicates that installation of

the pipeline would provide an

economic means of linking the

substantial deep-water reserves being

developed in the Mississippi Canyon

Area, and the Viosca Knoll Area to Koch

Gateway’s system and to the interstate

grid. Koch Gateway also states that,

unless the new line is built, capacity

constraints will result from the limited

available capacity currently taking gas

away from the Venice area.

Koch Gateway estimates a

construction cost of $20,851,117, which

would be financed from funds generated

internally.

Koch Gateway proposes rolled-in rate

treatment for the proposed construction

because it contends that the project

provides system-wide benefits to

existing and future shippers. In support

of that contention, Koch Gateway states

that the supplies to be attached by this

facility will be attached to the southeast

side of its system and will help alleviate

system flow constraints from west to

east which exists during peak periods.

Koch Gateway points out that the

proposed facilities will provide a bypass

of an existing bottleneck on its facilities

upstream of Bastian Bay on its existing

12-inch, 16-inch, and 20-inch pipelines.

Koch Gateway also notes that the rate

impact on existing shippers is small

with no rate increase for a single service

exceeding 2.9 percent and the average

rate impact being 2.45 percent.

Comment date: July 9, 1996. in

accordance with Standard Paragraph F

at the end of this notice.

8. Northwest Pipeline Corporation

[Docket No., CP96–576–000]

Take notice that on June 17, 1996,

Northwest Pipeline Corporation

(Northwest), P.O. Box 58900, Salt Lake

City, Utah 84158–0900, filed in Docket

No. CP96–576–000 a request pursuant to

Sections 157.205 and 157.211 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.211) for authorization to construct

and operate a new lateral and meter

station in Clark County, Washington, for

deliveries to a proposed electric power

generation facility, under the blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP82–

433–000, pursuant to Section 7(c) of the

Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request which is on file with

the Commission and open to public

inspection.

Northwest proposes to construct and

operate an approximately 2.775 mile 10-

inch lateral pipeline from an

interconnect with its Portland Lateral,

and paralleling and extending beyond

the existing Vancouver Lateral in Clark

County, Washington, and the new River

Road Meter Station at the terminus of

the new lateral in order to provide up

to 48,000 dt equivalent of firm service

to a planned new Clark Public Utility

District No. 1 River Road Generating

Project (River Road) in Clark County,

Washington. It is indicated that

Washington Water Power Company

(Water Power) would arrange for the

natural gas supplies and transportation

services necessary for operation of the

River Road power generating plant

pursuant to various Part 284

transportation agreements using its own

capacity and capacity released by other

shippers, including Inland Pacific

Energy Services (Inland). It is also stated

that Water Power has reached an

agreement with Inland whereby Inland

will arrange for Northwest to construct

and necessary the delivery facilities to

serve the River Road plant. Northwest

states that in return, upon completion of

construction of the proposed delivery

facilities, Water Power has agreed to

take permanent assignment of both

Inland’s resulting Facilities Agreement

and its Rate Schedule TF–1

transportation agreement dated

September 1, 1990.

Northwest states that the Facilities

Agreement supersedes and terminates

the September 15, 1993, Facilities

Agreement between Northwest and

Inland for a similar delivery facilities

project to serve a Klickitat Energy

Partners (KEP) cogeneration project,

which has since been cancelled. It is

stated that, by amendment to its F–33

agreement for 10,000 dt equivalent of

natural gas per day of contract demand,

Inland originally agreed to a twenty-year

term extension to satisfy the economic

criteria set forth in the Facilities

Reimbursement portion of Northwest’s

tariff for the KEP project. It is stated

that, pursuant to the superseding

Facilities Agreement, Northwest and

Inland have agreed to substitute the

River Road project for the cancelled KEP

project, thus applying the economic

value of the contract term extension to

the facilities proposed herein.

Northwest alleges that the present value

of additional future revenues generated

by the term extension exceeds the

present value of the incremental cost of

service attributable to the proposed

facilities, and thus Northwest will pay

for the $2.44 million facility cost

without reimbursement.

Comment date: August 1, 1996, in

accordance with Standard Paragraph G

at the end of this notice.

Standard Paragraphs

F. Any person desiring to be heard or

make any protest with reference to said

filing should on or before the comment

date file with the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First

Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, a

motion to intervene or a protest in

accordance with the requirements of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 26, 1996 / Notices 33113

385.214) and the Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All

protests filed with the Commission will

be considered by it in determining the

appropriate action to be taken but will

not serve to make the protestants parties

to the proceeding. Any person wishing

to become a party to a proceeding or to

participate as a party in any hearing

therein must file a motion to intervene

in accordance with the Commission’s

Rules.

Take further notice that, pursuant to

the authority contained in and subject to

jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission by

Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act

and the Commission’s Rules of Practice

and Procedure, a hearing will be held

without further notice before the

Commission or its designee on this

filing if no motion to intervene is filed

within the time required herein, if the

Commission on its own review of the

matter finds that a grant of the

certificate is required by the public

convenience and necessity. If a motion

for leave to intervene is timely filed, or

if the Commission on its own motion

believes that a formal hearing is

required, further notice of such hearing

will be duly given.

Under the procedure herein provided

for, unless otherwise advised, it will be

necessary for the applicant to appear or

be represented at the hearing.

G. Any person or the Commission’s

staff may, within 45 days after the

issuance of the instant notice by the

Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214

of the Commission’s Procedural Rules

(18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene

or notice of intervention and pursuant

to Section 157.205 of the Regulations

under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR

157.205) a protest to the request. If no

protest is filed within the time allowed

therefore, the proposed activity shall be

deemed to be authorized effective the

day after the time allowed for filing a

protest. If a protest is filed and not

withdrawn within 30 days after the time

allowed for filing a protest, the instant

request shall be treated as an

application for authorization pursuant

to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16219 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

Notice of Procedural Change in

Payment for Selected RIMS Documents

June 20, 1996.

In an effort to serve the public better

and expedite requests for doucments,

the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission today announces a

procedural change in payment for

selected RIMS documents.

Beginning July 1, 1996, the

Commission will begin assessing a

charge of 15 cents per page for all print

requests of 11 or more pages from the

Commission’s electronic Records and

Information Management System

(RIMS) III. This procedural change is

consistent with 18 CFR 388.109(a)(4).

A charge will be assessed on the

number of pages requested from RIMS

III, not the number of pages actually

selected by the user after the pages have

been printed. This change is being made

to improve the level of service and

reduce the delays and unnecessary

burden caused by requests for

documents and pages that are not

required after they have been printed.

Users now have the capability of

viewing many documents and

individual pages before they submit a

print request. RIMS III allows users to

view documents and print selected

pages. Since 1994, images of selected

documents have been available to users

for viewing and printing at the FERC’s

Washington Headquarters. All current

documents (11′′ x 17′′ and smaller) are

now being scanned and are available to

users at the Commission’s Public

Reference Room.

This does not affect the pages printed

from RIMS microfilm or aperture cards

(RIMS II). (Aperture cards are still being

made for pages larger than 11′′ x 17′′.)

Requests for RIMS pages available only

on, and printed from, microfilm and/or

aperture cards will be handled and

priced as they have been in the past,

since documents cannot be viewed prior

to being requested.

Please contact the staff at the Front

Desk (202) 208–1371 of the Public

Reference Room for further information.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16218 Filed 6–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[OPPTS–00189; FRL–5379–6]

Agency Information Collection

Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

EPA is planning to submit the following

new Information Collection Request

(ICR) to the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB). Before submitting the

ICR to OMB for review and approval,

EPA is soliciting comments on specific

aspects of the information collection as

described below. The ICR is a new ICR

entitled ‘‘Voluntary Cover Sheet for

TSCA Submissions,’’ EPA ICR No. 1780,

OMB control number to be assigned. An

Agency may not conduct or sponsor,

and a person is not required to respond

to, a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number. The OMB control numbers for

EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR

part 9.

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before August 26, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit three copies of all

written comments to: TSCA Document

Receipts (7407), Room NE-G99, Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460,

Telephone 202-260-7099. All comments

should reference administrative record

number AR-160. This ICR is available

for public review at, and copies may be

requested from, the docket address and

telephone number listed above.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to:

oppt.ncic@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the administrative

record number AR-160 and ICR number

1780. No CBI should be submitted

through e-mail. Electronic comments on

this document may be filed online at

many Federal Depository Libraries.

Additional information on electronic

submissions can be found in Unit III. of

this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information contact: Susan B.

Hazen, Director, Environmental

Assistance Division (7408), Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460,

Telephone: 202-554-1404, TDD: 202-

554-0551, e-mail:

TSCAHotline@epamail.epa.gov. For

technical information contact: Gerry

Brown, Information Management

Division (7407), Office of Pollution

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: 202-