Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 178 / Friday, September 15, 2017 / Notices 43361 

EPA published a draft title V permit for 

public comment. The public comment 

period ended on June 30, 2017, and EPA 

did not receive any significant 

comments. EPA issued the final permit 

for Mystic Lake Casino Hotel, permit 

number V–27139R0001–2016–01, on 

July 13, 2017. Pursuant to 40 CFR 

71.11(i)(2)(iii), the permit became 

effective immediately upon issuance 

since EPA did not receive any 

comments requesting a change in the 

draft permit. 

B. Appeal of the Permits 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 71.11(l), any 

person who filed comments on the draft 

permit may petition for administrative 

review subject to the requirements of 40 

CFR 71.11(l). If no one filed comments 

on the draft permit and the final permit 

is identical to the permit as proposed, 

any person may petition for 

administrative review of the permit only 

to the extent that grounds for a petition 

have arisen that were not reasonably 

foreseeable during the public comment 

period on the draft permit. For CS#5 

permit number V–FDL–271300066– 

2016–03, the 30-day period during 

which a person may seek review under 

40 CFR 71.11(l) began on January 30, 

2017. For Treasure Island Resort & 

Casino permit number V–PI– 

2704900084–2012–13, the 30-day period 

during which a person may seek review 

under 40 CFR 71.11(l) began on January 

31, 2017. For Grand Casino Hinckley 

permit number V–ML–2711500031– 

2016–01, the 30-day period during 

which a person may seek review under 

40 CFR 71.11(1) began on October 20, 

2016. For Grand Casino Hinckley permit 

number V–ML–2711500031–2016–02, 

the 30-day period during which a 

person may seek review under 40 CFR 

71.11(1) began on July 14, 2017. For 

Mystic Lake Casino Hotel permit 

number V–27139R0001–2016–01, the 

30-day period during which a person 

may seek review under 40 CFR 71.11(1) 

began on July 14, 2017. 

Pursuant 40 CFR 124.19(2), any 

person who filed comments on the draft 

PSD permit may file a petition for 

review as provided in 40 CFR 124.19. 

Additionally, any person who failed to 

file comments may petition for 

administrative review of any permit 

conditions set forth in the final permit 

decision, but only to the extent that 

those final permit conditions reflect 

changes from the proposed draft permit. 

For Grand Casino Hinckley permit 

number PSD–ML–2711500031–2017– 

03, the 30-day period during which a 

person may seek review under 40 CFR 

124.19 began on July 14, 2017. 

C. What is the purpose of this notice? 

EPA is notifying the public of the 

issuance of title V operating permits to 

Great Lakes Gas, NRG Reliability 

Solutions, LLC, Mille Lacs Corporate 

Ventures and SMSC. EPA is also 

notifying the public of the issuance of 

a title I construction permit to Mille 

Lacs Corporate Ventures. 

EPA issued permit number V–FDL– 

2713700066–2016–03 to Great Lakes 

Gas on January 26, 2017, which became 

effective immediately upon issuance. 

EPA issued permit number V–PI– 

2704900084–2012–13 to NRG Reliability 

Solutions, LLC on January 27, 2017, 

which became effective immediately 

upon issuance. EPA issued permit 

number V–ML–2711500031–2016–01 on 

October 20, 2016 to Mille Lacs 

Corporate Ventures, which became 

effective on November 20, 2016. EPA 

issued permit numbers V–ML– 

2711500031–2016–02 and PSD–ML– 

2711500031–2017–03 on July 6, 2017 to 

Mille Lacs Corporate Ventures, which 

became effective immediately upon 

issuance. EPA issued permit number V– 

27139R0001–2016–01 on July 13, 2017 

to SMSC, which became effective 

immediately upon issuance. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: August 14, 2017. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2017–19700 Filed 9–14–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0439; FRL–9967–70– 

OW] 

Request for Public Comments To Be 

Sent to Versar, Inc., on an Interim List 

of Perchlorate in Drinking Water Expert 

Peer Reviewers and Draft Peer Review 

Charge Questions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing 

a request for public comment on an 

interim list of peer review candidates 

and materials that relate to the expert 

peer review to support EPA’s Safe 

Drinking Water Act decision making for 

perchlorate. This request is one of two 

Federal Register notices being 

published concurrently, seeking public 

comment on two separate sets of 

materials. This notice requests 

comments to be sent to EPA’s 

contractor, Versar, Inc., on the interim 

list of peer review candidates and the 

draft charge questions. Versar, Inc., will 

consider the comments received on this 

notice in selecting the final peer review 

panel, which will collectively provide 

appropriate expertise spanning the 

subject matter areas covered by the draft 

report and, to the extent feasible, best 

provide a balance of perspectives. EPA 

will consider comments received on this 

notice to help inform the final peer 

review panel’s charge. The companion 

notice requests comments (to be sent to 

EPA) on a draft report entitled ‘‘Draft 

Report: Proposed Approaches to Inform 

the Derivation of a Maximum 

Contaminant Level Goal for Perchlorate 

in Drinking Water’’ (draft MCLG 

Approaches Report). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 6, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to 

Versar, Inc., no later than October 6, 

2017 by one of the following methods: 

• Email: perchlorate@versar.com 

(subject line: Perchlorate Peer Review) 

• Mail: Versar, Inc., 6850 Versar 

Center, Springfield, VA 22151 (ATTN: 

Tracey Cowen). 

Please be advised that public 

comments are subject to release under 

the Freedom of Information Act. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions concerning the interim list of 

expert peer review candidates and draft 

peer review charge questions should be 

directed to Versar, Inc., at 6850 Versar 

Center, Springfield, VA 22151; by email 

perchlorate@versar.com (subject line: 

Perchlorate Peer Review); or by phone: 

(301) 304–3121 (ask for Tracey Cowen). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Process of Obtaining Candidate 

Reviewers 

EPA announced a public nomination 

period from March 1, 2016, to March 31, 

2016, in the Federal Register (81 FR 

10617; March 1, 2016), during which 

members of the public were able to 

nominate scientific experts with 

knowledge and experience in one or 

more of the following areas: (1) 

Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic 

(PBPK), physiologically-based 

pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic 

(PBPK/PD) and/or biologically based 

dose-response (BBDR) modeling, (2) 

fetal and neonatal thyroid 

endocrinology (clinical and 

experimental), (3) iodide homeostasis, 

and (4) perchlorate toxicology and mode 

of action or adverse outcome pathway. 

On June 3, 2016, in the Federal Register 

(81 FR 35760), EPA invited the public 

to also nominate scientific experts with 

knowledge and experience in one or 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

43362 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 178 / Friday, September 15, 2017 / Notices 

1OMB’s memorandum is available at https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/jsp/Utilities/Review_and_

Stay_Memo_for_EEOC.pdf. 

2The September 29, 2016 Notice of OMB Action 

was reissued on October 18, 2016. https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_

nbr=201610-3046-001# 

more of the following areas of human 

health risk assessment: (1) An 

understanding of thyroid function 

(preferably in the sensitive life stages of 

interest), (2) the importance of maternal 

thyroid hormone homeostasis in each 

stage of gestation, (3) hypothyroxinemia, 

(4) neurodevelopmental assessment 

indices for young children including the 

Bayley’s Scale, (5) the toxicity of 

perchlorate, (6) epidemiological 

assessment techniques, and (7) 

statistics. 

Versar, Inc., considered the 

nominated peer review candidates and 

also conducted an independent search 

for scientific experts to augment the list 

of publically-nominated candidates. 

Selection Process: Versar, Inc., 

considered and screened all candidates 

against the selection criteria described 

in the March 1, 2016, and June 3, 2016, 

Federal Register notices (81 FR 10617 

and 81 FR 35760, respectively), which 

included the candidates being free of 

any conflict of interest and being 

available to participate in-person in a 

two-day, public, peer review meeting in 

the Washington, DC, area. Versar, Inc., 

narrowed the list of potential reviewers 

for the second panel to 12 candidates. 

EPA is now soliciting comments on the 

interim list of 12 candidates. 

EPA requests that the public provide 

relevant information or documentation 

on the experts that the contractor should 

consider in evaluating these candidates. 

Once the public comments on the 

interim list of candidates have been 

reviewed and considered, the contractor 

will select the final list of peer 

reviewers. 

Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers: 

Peer reviewers will be charged with 

evaluating and preparing written 

comments on EPA’s draft MCLG 

Approaches Report. Versar, Inc., will 

provide reviewers with a summary and 

compilation of public comments on the 

draft MCLG Approaches Report 

submitted to EPA’s docket (ID number 

EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0438) during the 

45-day public comment period, for their 

consideration. Reviewers will 

participate in a two-day meeting 

expected to be held in the Washington, 

DC, metro area, projected to occur in 

late fall of 2017 (exact date to be 

determined), to discuss the scientific 

basis supporting these materials. 

Following the meeting, Versar, Inc., will 

provide a report to EPA, summarizing 

the peer reviewers’ evaluation of the 

scientific and technical merit of the 

draft MCLG Approaches Report and the 

peer reviewers’ full responses to the 

charge questions. EPA will make the 

final peer review report available to the 

public (exact date to be determined). In 

preparing the final MCLG Approaches 

Report, EPA will consider the peer 

review report as well as the written 

public comments submitted to the 

docket. 

II. Interim List of Peer Reviewers 

Versar, Inc., is considering the 

following candidates for the peer review 

panel. Biosketches are available through 

the EPA docket at http://

www.regulations.gov (Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0439). After review 

and consideration of public comments 

and consultation with EPA’s Scientific 

Integrity Official, Versar, Inc., will select 

from this list, the final list of peer 

reviewers, who will, collectively, best 

provide expertise spanning the 

previously mentioned areas of 

knowledge and experience and, to the 

extent feasible, best provide a balance of 

perspectives. EPA will announce the 

peer review panel meeting date, location 

and registration details, along with the 

final list of peer reviewers selected by 

Versar, Inc., at least 30 days prior to the 

meeting. 

Name of Nominee, Degree, Place of 

Employment 

1. Hugh A. Barton, Ph.D., Pfizer, Inc. 

2. Nancy Carrasco, M.D., Yale School of 

Medicine 

3. Jonathan Chevrier, Ph.D., McGill 

University Faculty of Medicine 

4. Claude Emond, Ph.D., University of 

Montreal 

5. Dale Hattis, Ph.D., George Perkins 

Marsh Institute, Clark University 

6. Judy S. LaKind, Ph.D., LaKind 

Associates, LLC 

7. Angela M. Leung, M.D., M.Sc., UCLA 

David Geffen School of Medicine 

8. Paul H. Lipkin, M.D., Johns Hopkins 

University School of Medicine 

9. Elizabeth N. Pearce, M.D., M.Sc., 

Boston Medical Center/Boston 

University School of Medicine 

10. Stephen M. Roberts, Ph.D., 

University of Florida 

11. Joanne F. Rovet, Ph.D., The Hospital 

for Sick Children (Toronto) 

12. Craig Steinmaus, M.D., M.P.H., 

University of California, Berkeley 

III. Draft Peer Review Charge Questions 

The draft peer review charge 

questions are available through the EPA 

docket at http://www.regulations.gov 

(Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2016– 

0439). 

Dated: September 6, 2017. 

Michael H. Shapiro, 

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Water. 

[FR Doc. 2017–19702 Filed 9–14–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

[3046–0007] 

Stay the Effectiveness of the EEO–1 

Pay Data Collection 

AGENCY: Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) 

announces that, until further notice, 

filers subject to the EEO–1 reporting 

requirement should not submit 

aggregate data about W–2 (Box 1) 

income and hours worked, which is the 

information required by ‘‘Component 2’’ 

of the EEO–1 report as approved on 

September 29, 2016. However, filers 

should continue to submit data on the 

ethnicity, race, and sex of workers by 

job category (‘‘Component 1’’ of the 

EEO–1 report). This is the same type of 

EEO–1 data that filers have submitted in 

the past. 

DATES: All EEO–1 filers should submit 

and certify their 2017 EEO–1 reports 

(Component 1 data only) by March 31, 

2018. They should count employees for 

purposes of this EEO–1 report during a 

‘‘workforce snapshot period’’ between 

October 1 and December 31, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ronald Edwards, Director, Program 

Research and Surveys Division, Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission, 

131 M Street NE., Room 4SW30F, 

Washington, DC 20507 (202) 663–4949 

(voice) or (202) 663–7063 (TTY). 

Requests for this notice in an alternative 

format should be made to the Office of 

Communications and Legislative Affairs 

at (202) 663–4191 (voice) or (202) 663– 

4494 (TTY). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

29, 2017, the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) issued a memorandum 1

informing the EEOC that OMB was 

initiating a review and immediate stay 

of the effectiveness of a portion of the 

EEO–1 report that was initially 

approved on September 29, 2016.2

Specifically, OMB initiated a review 

and immediate stay of the portion of the 

EEO–1 report that required the reporting 

of aggregate W–2 (Box 1) income and 

hours-worked data by employers 

(including federal contractors) with 100 

or more employees. (This is called EEO– 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES