In Addition The Texas Register is required by statute to publish certain documents, including applications to purchase control of state banks, notices of rate ceilings, changes in interest rate and applications to install remote service units, and consultant proposal requests and awards. To aid agencies in communicating information quickly and effectively, other information of general interest to the public is published as space allows. Texas Education Agency Request for Exhibits The Texas Education Agency, Office of Programs and Instruction, is requesting exhibits on commercially available materials and services pertaining to dropout prevention and recovery at the Sixth Annual Texas Conference on Students in At- Risk Situations on April 18-21, 1993, at the Austin Convention Center in Austin. The conference will be attended by more than 2,000 school district personnel, state agency personnel, Job Training Partnership Act Service providers, and other state and local service providers. No more than 100 exhibits will be accepted due to space limitation. A fee of $250 will be charged for two and a half days on Sunday (April 18, 3 p.m.-7 p.m. ), Monday, (April 19, 7 a.m.-5 p.m.) and Tuesday, (April 20, 7 a.m.-5 p.m.). Minority businesses or businesses with minority representatives are encouraged to apply. All inquiries should be made to Darlene Yanez, Exhibits Chairperson, Division of Accelerated Instruction, Texas Education Agency, 1701 North Congress Avenue, Austin, Texas 78701-1494, or (512) 463-9374. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317861 Lionel R. "Skip" Meno Commissioner of Education Texas Education Agency Filed: January 20, 1993 Request for Proposals #701-93-006 RFP #701-93-006. This request for proposal is filed pursuant to Article VII, sec.5(d) of the Texas Constitution. Eligible Proposers. The Texas Education Agency is requesting proposals (RFP #701-93-006) from banks or trust companies to provide master trust custodian services, including administration of a securities lending program, for the State Permanent School Fund of Texas. Description. To provide for prudent management and efficient operation of the Permanent School Fund of Texas (Fund), the State Board of Education desires to contract with a bank or trust company to provide master trust custodian services, act as the Depository Trust Company correspondent, and to administer a securities lending program for the Fund. Dates of Project. Beginning date for the contract is estimated to be September 1, 1993, but may be expedited by the State Board of Education to an earlier date, if deemed necessary. The contract will end on or before August 31, 1997, depending on the availability of funds. Project Amount. The compensation arrangement will consist of a combination of the payment of custody and securities clearance fees, based on a fee per transaction or service provided, and income earned from the operation of a securities lending program for the benefit of the Fund. Selection Criteria. The contract will be awarded based an evaluation of the proposer's ability to provide the requested services and carry out all requirements contained in the request for proposal, in compliance with all applicable laws, including but not limited to Article VII of the Texas Constitution. Requesting the Proposal . A copy of the complete request for proposal (RFP #701-93-006) may be obtained by writing or calling the Document Control Center, Room 6-108, Texas Education Agency, William B. Travis Building, 1701 North Congress Avenue, Austin, Texas 78701-1494, or call (512) 463-9304. Please refer to the RFP Number in your request. Further Information. For clarifying information about this request, contact Deborah Saunders, Director of Investment Accounting, Investment Office, Texas Education Agency, (512) 463-9169. Deadline for Receipt of Proposals. The deadline for submitting a proposal is 5 p.m., Friday, March 5, 1993. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317862 Lionel R. Meno Commissioner of Education Texas Education Agency Filed: January 20, 1993 Texas Department of Health Licensing Actions for Radioactive Materials The Texas Department of Health (department) has taken actions regarding licenses for the possession and use of radioactive materials as listed in the following table. The subheading labeled "Location" indicates the city in which the radioactive material may be possessed and/or used. The location listing "Throughout Texas" indicates that the radioactive material may be used on a temporary basis at job sites throughout the state. [graphic] In amending and terminating these existing licenses, the Texas Department of Health, Bureau of Radiation Control is acting in response to the directive of Senate Bill 2 of the 72nd Legislature, which transferred regulatory authority pertaining to the disposal of radioactive substances from the department to the Texas Water Commission. The amendments and terminations of the aforementioned licenses reflect the withdrawal of that regulatory authority from licenses issued by the department. That regulatory authority has been assumed by the Texas Water Commission in a separate action by the issuance of radioactive material licenses containing the authorizations and restrictions removed from, by amendment or termination, the department licenses. These amendments and terminations are ministerial only. Copies of these documents and supporting materials are available for inspection and copying at the Bureau of Radiation Control, Texas Department of Health, Exchange Building, 8407 Wall Street, Austin, Texas, from 8 a.m. to 5 p. m. Monday-Friday (except holidays). Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 8, 1993. TRD-9317736 Robert A. MacLean, M.D. Deputy Commissioner Texas Department of Health Filed: January 15, 1993 Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs Request for Proposals for Capacity Building Training Manual The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) as the administering agency for the State of Texas HOME Program and Housing Trust Fund, announces a request for proposals (RFP) for the development of a training manual for non-profit housing developers and Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs). The training manual should be comprised of a variety of topics including, but not limited to the following outline: [graphic] Eligible applicants include individuals or organizations with at least five years housing/community development experience. Proposals must be received by TDHCA no later than 5 p.m., February 15, 1993. Furthermore, the State reserves the right to accept or reject any or all proposals submitted. The State is under no obligation to execute a contract on the basis of this RFP. The State intends to use responses as a basis for further negotiation of specific program details with potential contractors. If a contractor(s) is selected to provide the services described in this RFP, the decision will be based upon criteria including, but not limited to, the following: Proposal order and content according to the RFP packet instruction; description of applicant's background and experience; adequacy of measurable activities/units in program narrative; interagency coordination; description of project operations and staffing responsibilities; description of applicant's reporting capabilities; a plan of project review with TDHCA as well as an outline of each phase of the project; applicant's coordination with public and private entities; and applicant's ability to support the project after funding terminates. Upon completion of the project, the manual is the sole property of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. No rights of ownership may be retained by the contractor. This request does not commit the State to pay for any cost incurred prior to the execution of contracts. The State specifically reserves the right to vary all provisions at any time prior to the execution of a contract(s) if such variances are deemed to be in the best interest of the State, and to otherwise act as it determines at its sole discretion. To obtain an RFP packet or additional information regarding this notice, please contact: Ninfa Moncada, Director or Marketing and Development Division, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, P.O. Box 13941, Austin, Texas 78711-3941, (512) 475-3827. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317860 Sam Guzman Acting Executive Director Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs Filed: January 20, 1993 Texas Department of Human Services Public Notice of Closed Solicitation Pursuant to the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Chapters 22 and 32, and 40 TAC sec.19.2004, in the September 11, 1990, issue of the Texas Register (15 TexReg 5315), the Texas Department of Human Services (TDHS) is closing the solicitation for new Medicaid beds in Rains County, County Number 190, which appeared in the September 25, 1992, issue of the Texas Register (17 TexReg 6645). The solicitation is being closed effective the date of this public notice. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 14, 1993. TRD-9317677 Nancy Murphy Agency Liaison, Policy and Document Support Texas Department of Human Services Filed: January 14, 1993 Public Notice of Open Solicitation Pursuant to the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Chapters 22 and 32, and 40 TAC sec.19.2004, in the September 11, 1990, issue of the Texas Register (15 TexReg 5315), the Texas Department of Human Services (TDHS) is announcing an open solicitation period of 30 days, effective the date of this public notice, for the county identified, where Medicaid contracted nursing facility occupancy rates exceed the threshold (90% occupancy) in each of five months in the continuous June-November, six-month period. Potential contractors seeking to contract for existing beds which are currently licensed as nursing home beds or hospital beds in the county identified in this public notice must submit a written reply (as described in 40 TAC sec.19.2004) to TDHS, Gary L. Allen, Institutional Program Section, Long Term Care Department, Mail Code W-519, Post Office Box 149030, Austin, Texas 78714-9030. The written reply must be received by TDHS by 5 p.m., February 22, 1993, the last day of the open solicitation period. Potential contractors will be placed on a waiting list for the primary selection process in the order in which the Texas Department of Health originally licensed the beds that are being proposed for Medicaid participation. The primary selection process will be completed on March 5, 1993. If there are insufficient available beds after the primary selection to reduce occupancy rates to less that 80%, TDHS will place a public notice in the Texas Register announcing an additional open solicitation period for those individuals wishing to construct a facility. [graphic] Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 14, 1993. TRD-9317676 Nancy Murphy Agency Liaison, Policy and Document Support Texas Department of Human Services Filed: January 14, 1993 Texas Department of Insurance Company License Applications The following applications have been filed with the Texas Department of Insurance and are under consideration. 1. Application for Incorporation of Texas for Diversified Risk Management Services, Inc., a domestic third party administrator. The home office is in Arlington, Texas. 2. Application for Admission in Texas for Gateway Insurance Company, a foreign fire insurance company. The home office is in St. Louis, Missouri. 3. Application for Admission in Texas for Liberty Insurance Services Corporation, a foreign third party administrator. The home office is in Greenville, South Carolina. 4. Application for Admission in Texas for Managing Underwriters, Inc., a foreign third party administrator. The home office is in Westerville, Ohio. 5. Application for Admission in Texas for Republic Indemnity Company of America, a foreign fire insurance company. The home office is in Encino, California. 6. Application for Admission in Texas for Republic Indemnity Company of California, a foreign fire insurance company. The home office is in Encino, California. 7. Application for Incorporation in Texas for Republic National Life Insurance Company, a domestic life insurance company. The home office is in Houston, Texas. 8. Application for name change in Texas for Monumental General Insurance Company, a foreign life insurance company. The home office is in Des Moines, Iowa. The proposed new name is Toyota Motor Life Insurance Company. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 19, 1993. TRD-9317848 Linda K. von Quintus-Dorn Chief Clerk Texas Department of Insurance Filed: January 19, 1993 Texas State Library and Archives Commission Consultant Contract Reports By law (Texas Civil Statutes, Article 6252-11c), state agencies and regional councils of governments are required to file with the Office of the Secretary of State invitations to bid and details on bidding on private consultant contracts expected to exceed $10,000. Within 10 days of the award of the contract, the agency must file with the Secretary of State a description of the study to be conducted, the name of the consultant, the amount of the contract, and the due dates of the reports. Additionally, Article 6252-11c, directs the contracting agencies to file copies of all documents, films, recordings, or reports developed by the private consultants with the Texas State Library. The Library is required to compile a list of the materials received and submit the list quarterly for publication in the Texas Register. Following is a list of materials received for the Fourth quarter of 1992. These materials may be examined in Room 300, Texas State Library, 1201 Brazos Street, Austin. Agency: Attorney General, Consultant: David M. Griffith & Associates, Title: State and local area agreement. Agency: Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, Consultant: Joseph M. Peraino, Ph.D., P.C. and Associates, Title: Program evaluation and cost- benefit analysis of the In-Home and Family Support Program. Agency: Education Agency, Consultant: EGS Research and Consulting, Title: Case study of family and community experiences in transition from school to post- school life for students receiving special education services. Consultant: Gallaudet University, Center for Assessment and Demographic Studies, Title: 1991-1992 final report: Texas study of hearing impaired children and youth. Agency: Employees Retirement System, Consultant: Wyatt Group, Title: Various materials. Agency: Library and Archives Commission, Consultant: Abilene Christian University, Title: Consultant's report on a review of the Abilene Library Consortium (ALC). Agency: Parks and Wildlife Department, Consultant: Sterling Information Group, Inc., Title: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department integrated information systems, 4v. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 12, 1993. TRD-9317671 Raymond Hitt Assistant Director Texas State Library and Archives Commission Filed: January 14, 1993 Public Utility Commission of Texas Notice of Intent to File Pursuant to Public Utility Commission Substantive Rule 23.27 Notice is given to the public of the intent to file with the Public Utility Commission of Texas an application pursuant to Public Utility Commission Substantive Rule 23.27 for approval of customer-specific PLEXAR-Custom Service for Bausch and Lomb, San Antonio. Docket Title and Number . Application of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company for Approval of Plexar-Custom Service for Bausch and Lomb pursuant to Public Utility Commission Substantive Rule 23.27(k). Docket Number 11720. The Application. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company is requesting approval of Plexar-Custom Service for Bausch and Lomb. The geographic service market for this specific service is the San Antonio area. Persons who wish to comment upon the action sought should contact the Public Utility Commission of Texas, at 7800 Shoal Creek Boulevard, Austin, Texas 78757, or call the Public Utility Commission Public Information Section at (512) 458- 0256, or (512) 458-0221 for teletypewriter for the deaf. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 14, 1993. TRD-9317754 John M. Renfrow Secretary of the Commission Public Utility Commission of Texas Filed: January 15, 1993 Railroad Commission of Texas Comments to the GLO Proposed Amendments to Oil Spill Prevention and Response Rules GLO Proposed Amendments to Oil Spill Prevention and Response Rules, 31 TAC sec.19 (17 TexReg 7515) October 23, 1992. Over the last few months, the staffs of the Railroad Commission of Texas and the General Land Office have worked to devise a workable administrative structure for OSPRA. These proposed rules are an integral part of that effort. In response to previous comments by the Railroad Commission, the staff and other interested parties, these rule amendments now provide an exemption for "exploration and production" facilities from the coastal facility certification requirement. The commission continues to have concerns over the scope of this exemption and its actual wording. Additionally, the commission is troubled that the concept of "imminent threat" to coastal waters, as established by OSPRA, as well as the limited jurisdictional scope of OSPRA is being blurred or ignored in these proposed rules. The proposed rules reflect, what the commission perceives to be, a continued misreading as well as perhaps misunderstanding of the oil industry and existing regulation. As a result, these rules have caused and will continue to cause confusion in the industry and conflict between the Railroad Commission and the General Land Office. The commission urges the General Land Office to clarify these proposed rules, by bringing them in line with the intent and express language of OSPRA. Below the commission addresses outstanding issues relating to the specific sections of these rules. A. sec.19.11(b)(2) Exemption of Exploration and Production Facilities This section provides that inland "exploration and production facilities" are not required to comply with the facility certification requirements. However, major inland storage facilities, as defined in the rules, and certain inland pipelines are expressly excluded from this exemption. We believe such exclusion is unwarranted, overly broad, and inconsistent with OSPRA; some operators of inland facilities never intended to be covered by the coastal facility certification requirements of OSPRA are now covered. We agree with your public comments announced in the recent GLO newsletter that the main concern is "the big transporters, refiners, and other users of oil along the coasts, not inland operators who may have a few producing wells and one or two storage batteries." Huge storage facilities adjacent to coastal refineries (with 80,000 barrels or more capacity) are a potential threat to coastal waters. However, smaller tank fans or satellite stations that may be located miles inland do not ordinarily pose a threat to coastal waters and should not be required to obtain a facility certification. The average tank battery on an inland producing lease consists of twin 210-barrel storage tanks and poses no threat to coastal waters. As we noted in Commission comments to you, dated July 24, 1992, only facilities located on the waterfront or offshore- not inland-were intended to be covered under OSPRA's facility certification provisions. (Previous comments are attached as Exhibit "A" and are incorporated in these comments.) The term "major storage facility" is a new and undefined term in GLO rules. If major storage facilities are "major facilities," which are defined in sec.l9. ll(f), as "facilities that have an oil storage or daily oil transfer capacity of more than 10,000 U.S. gallons" (238 barrels), then you have excluded many production tanks and their operators from the exemption for exploration and production facilities and rendered the exemption meaningless. The preamble to the proposed rules states that the certification exemption is intended to exclude inland oil facilities that are already under governmental regulation by the Railroad Commission. The preamble recognizes the lack of justification for imposing further economic burdens on inland facilities without a corresponding increase in protection for coastal waters. Inland pipelines and major storage facilities like tank farms are just as deserving of this consideration. The Commission regulates pipelines, storage and other oil facilities for safety and pollution control and prevention, including response and cleanup, pursuant to both state and federal requirements. The exemption, therefore, fails to recognize and take advantage of the full scope of the Commission's regulatory jurisdiction over storage, pipeline and handling facilities. For consistency with present law and to prevent redundant and duplicative regulation, we recommend that the exemption for "exploration and production facilities" track current oil and gas statutes and terminology, which define Railroad Commission jurisdiction and the regulated oil industry activities. See Texas Natural Resource Code sec.91.101, Texas Water Code sec.26.131, the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act, Texas Natural Resource Code, chapter 117, as well as OSPRA, Texas Natural Resource Code sec.40.008. We propose the following exemption for your consideration, in lieu of the proposed language of subdivision (2) of sec.19.ll(b): (2) facilities engaged in activities associated with the exploration, development, or production of oil, gas, or geotherrnal resources, including the transportation of oil or gas by pipeline and regulated under Texas Natural Resources Code sec.9l.l0l, Texas Water Code sec.26.131, and Texas Natural Resources Code chapter 117 (Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act), but which are not located on the waterfront or offshore. This language, in part, was taken directly out of OSPRA. The language reflects not only the statutory intent in OSPRA to require facility certification for only waterfront or offshore oil facilities, but also your intent as expressed in your letter to former Chairman Lena Guerrero, on July 30, 1992: I am amending the registration requirement for inland oil exploration and production facilities. Only those facilities which are offshore or waterfront need to comply with the registration requirements of OSPRA.... We will look to the RRC's rules and practices for pollution prevention and financial responsibility to carry out those portions of OSPRA mandate. Letter attached as Exhibit "B". B. Coastal Facility Designation Line and Related Definitions. Our comments relating to the Coastal Facility Designation Line ("facility line") are both stylistic and substantive. You have placed a definition for the facility line under sec.19.2(a)(5), which appears to be a definition for the term "facility". For clarity, if nothing else, the term "coastal facility designation line" should stand on its own as a separate definition. Placing it under the definition for "facility" raises questions as to that definition's meaning as well as the purpose of the language relating specifically to the facility line. The first two sentences of the definition for the facility line are clear; however, the next sentence "A discharge from a facility located coastward of this line is a discharge which may pose an imminent threat to coastal waters" seems out of place sec.19.2(a)(5)(B). Further, while we are not completely certain of the purpose and intent of that statement, we would suggest, that regardless of its location, it read as follows: "Under certain circumstances, a dischage from a facility located coastward of this line may be a discharge which poses an imminent threat to coastal waters." Clearly, the statement as proposed is factually inaccurate and serves no purpose. Similar problems arise in Appendix I, which, in pertinent part, reads: COASTAL FACILITY DESIGNATION LINE. All areas east and south of the following boundary are considered areas in which spills threaten coastal waters.... (emphasis added.) Commission staff understood from previous conversations with GLO staff that the facility line is used in defining threats to coastal waters for purposes of facility certification, only by delineating the area in which spills might pose a threat. This language, however, reads as a broad statement that spills within that area actually do threaten coastal waters. It is inconsistent with the intent of GLO staff and is factually inaccurate as well. The statement should read: "areas in which spills may threaten coastal waters." The language we propose for both sections is also consistent with the intent of OSPRA and represents a more realistic assessment of actual threats to coastal waters from inland facilities. As you can see, beyond the structural problems of the definition for the facility line, in sec.19.2(a)(5)(B), is the lack of clarity in what the definition and Appendix 1 is suppose to achieve. One sentence of the definition declares that the purpose of the facility line is limited to defining which facilities must file certification plans. The remaining language, however, appears to expand the purpose of the facility line to include defining the scope of GLO action relating to response and notification, far beyond the intent of OSPRA. The first sentence of the Appendix is an equally expansive assertion that any spill within the facility line is a threat to coastal waters. (See also, comments under Sections C & D below.) We have already conveyed to you our dissatisfaction with the facility line and its lack of any rational or legal basis, whether it is limited to defining facilities subject to certification or an attempt to expand the GLO's response and clean-up activities beyond the scope outlined in OSPRA. Please see Exhibit "A." When you indicated to former Chairman Guerrero that you were exempting "exploration and production facilities" from the certification requirement, we assumed that you agreed with the Commission's comments (Exhibit "A") and the concerns of various parties with the facility line. The exemption for some inland exploration and production facilities only partially resolves these concerns in light of the language of sec.19.2(a)(5)(B). To resolve any doubts and to avoid possible legal challenge, we urge a clearer statement as to the purpose of this definition and the use of the facility line. C. Concept of Imminent Threat In the definition of the facility line and elsewhere in these rules, the statutory concept of imminent threat to coastal waters is being eroded. "Imminent threat" as used in OSPRA is a phrase that connotes an immediate-not potential-threat. This issue arises now because GLO is proposing to delete the 12-hour rule, which served as a surrogate for the concept of "imminent threat. " We suggest that the agency definitions should incorporate more than the geographical parameters represented by the facility line; they should also incorporate the concept of an imminent threat to coastal waters. To this end, we offer the following amendments to pertinent sections of these rules: 1.sec.19.2(a)(5)(A) Delete "could enter or threaten to enter coastal waters" and insert instead "poses an imminent threat to coastal waters." 2.sec.19.2(a)(5)(B) Amend as follows: The coastal facility designation line, described in this subsection, delineates the area within which a facility may be subject to the certification requirements of sec.19.12 of this title (relating to Facility Certification). The line does not delineate OSPRA's response or notification requirements. Under certain circumstances, a discharge from a facility located coastward of this line may be [is] a discharge which poses [may pose] an imminent threat to coastal waters. [A place where a discharge of oil from a facility could potentially threaten coastal waters is any place located on the coastal side of the line drawn on the map attached at Appendix 1 to these sections.] A discharge poses an imminent threat to coastal waters when shutting off the source of the spill or secondary containment are insufficient, and further immediate and direct action must be taken at the site to prevent an oil spill from entering coastal waters. We have taken the concept of direct intervention from the language of sec.19. 55(d)(3) and GLO newsletters as well as from the statutory definitions of OSPRA. D. Jurisdictional Limits of OSPRA 1.sec.19.2(a)(15)(B) In OSPR: "Discharge of oil" means an intentional or unintentional act or omission by which harmful quantities of oil are spilled, leaked, pumped, poured, emitted, or dumped into or on coastal waters or at a place adjacent to coastal waters where, unless controlled or removed, an imminent threat of pollution to coastal waters exists. Texas Natural Resources Code sec.40.003(7) (emphasis added). The highlighted portion of the statute restricts the state's regulatory activity pursuant to OSPRA to discharges on land in three interrelated ways: as to location: only in places adjacent to coastal waters, as to situation: only when an uncontrolled situation exists, and as to time frame: only when the threat is immediate or imminent These concepts are not followed in sec.19.2(a)(15)(B) which defines "unauthorized discharge of oil." The definition in (l5)(B) should be amended for consistency with the Act, as follows: (B)on any waters or land adjacent to coastal waters where harmful quantities of oil [may] enter coastal waters or pose an imminent threat to [threaten to enter] coastal waters if the discharge is not abated nor contained and the oil is not removed. 2. sec.19.31 Jurisdiction As drafted, sec.19.31 regarding the General Land Office's jurisdiction could be misleading. With the deletion of the 12-hour rule from this section, it is unclear as to the need or purpose of the remaining jurisdictional statement. Such a provision at the very least should inform interested parties of the delineation of authority in a dual agency regulatory system. OSPRA specifically addresses the role of other agencies in spill response. We suggest either deleting this provision in its entirety or amending it to read as follows: The General Land Office (GLO) is lead agency for initiating response to spills arising under OSPRA. GLO is the on-scene coordinator for spills over 240 barrels into coastal waters or that pose an imminent threat to coastal waters, unless GLO designates another agency. The Railroad Commission will act as the state- designated on-scene coordinator for all unauthorized discharges of 240 barrels or less of oil from exploration, development or production facilities. The GLO or the Railroad Commission will respond to any actual or threatened unauthorized discharge, under their respective jurisdictions, that enters or poses an imminent threat to coastal waters. A discharge poses an imminent threat to coastal waters when shutting off the source of the spill or secondary containment are insufficient, and further immediate and direct action must be taken at the site to prevent an oil spill from entering coastal waters. E. sec.19.55(d)(3)Response Costs For internal consistency, we suggest revisions, as indicated, to the following provisions: 1.sec.19.55(c) Whenever GLO personnel respond to the scene of a threatened or actual unauthorized discharge of oil, the following costs shall be assessed against the responsible person: 2. sec.l9.55(d) GLO will assess response costs in the following instances. 3. Oil does not enter coastal waters, but poses an imminent threat [threatens to] and an immediate and direct response is required to prevent the oil from entering coastal waters: the actual costs of GLO personnel in responding to and monitoring the activities to prevent the oil from entering coastal waters. 3. Add a new subsection to read as follows: (f). The GLO and Railroad Commission may provide by a memorandum of understanding for the collection of expenses and response costs incurred by the Railroad Commission in accordance with this Section. The industry should be given notice that, under OSPRA, it is responsible for costs relating to a spill regardless of which agency is the on-scene coordinator. As drafted, the proposed new rule sec.19.55 suggests that costs will be assessed only when GLO personnel respond. The Railroad Commission may require reimbursement for costs associated with response and cleanup of an OSPRA spill under special circumstances. The exact circumstances under which the Railroad Commission would seek reimbursement will be developed in the MOU currently under discussion by our staffs. Your consideration of these issues and revisions is appreciated. We would be happy to meet with you individually or together to discuss these comments should you so desire. The Commission's last regularly scheduled meeting is December 21. Please let us know if we or Commission staff may provide you with further information. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 13, 1993. TRD-9317624 Nolan Ward Hearings Examiner, Legal Division-General Law Railroad Commission of Texas Filed: January 13, 1993 Texas Department of Transportation, Division of Aviation Correction of Error The Texas Department of Transportation, Division of Aviation, submitted a Request for Proposals notice which appeared in the January 1, 1993, Texas Register (18 TexReg 84). Due to an error in the agency's submission, the return address in the third paragraph of the notice was incorrect. The return address should read as follows. "Texas Department of Transportation, Division of Aviation, Attention: Anna Saldana, TxDOT Project Number 94-18-041 or TxDOT Project Number 94-07-011, P.O. Box 12607, Austin, TX 78711 or 410 East 5th Street, Austin, TX 78701." Notice of Contract Awards Under the provisions of Texas Civil Statutes, Article 664-4, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) publishes this notice of a consultant contract award for providing professional engineering services. The request for qualifications for professional engineering services was published in the September 4, 1992, issue of the Texas Register (17 TexReg 6119). The consultant will provide engineering services for the design and construction administration phases for the following TxDOT project: 94-21-041, Culberson County Airport, Van Horn. The engineering firm for these services is Parkhill, Smith and Cooper, Inc., 5214 Thomason Drive, Midland, Texas 79703. The total value of the contract is $89,872 and the contract period started on January 12, 1993, until the completion of the project. If there are any questions, please contact Karon Wiedemann, Manager, Grant Administration, Division of Aviation, (512) 476-9262. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 15, 1993. TRD-9317771 Diane L. Northam Legal Administrative Assistant Texas Department of Transportation Filed: January 15, 1993 Under the provisions of Texas Civil Statutes, Article 664-4, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) publishes this notice of a consultant contract award for providing professional engineering services. The request for qualifications for professional engineering services was published in the September 4, 1992, issue of the Texas Register (17 TexReg 6117). The consultant will provide engineering services for the design and construction administration phases for the following TxDOT project: 94-10-81, Georgetown Municipal Airport. The engineering for these services is Epsey, Huston & Associates, Inc., 916 Capital of Texas Highway South, Austin, Texas 78746. The total value of the contract is $60,000 and the contract period started on January 11, 1993, until the completion of the project. If there are any questions, please contact Karon Wiedemann, Manager, Grant Administration, Division of Aviation, (512) 476-9262. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 15, 1993. TRD-9317772 Diane L. Northam Legal Administrative Assistant Texas Department of Transportation Filed: January 15, 1993 Under the provisions of Texas Civil Statutes, Article 664-4, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) publishes this notice of a consultant contract award for providing professional engineering services. The request for qualifications for professional engineering services was published in the September 4, 1992, issue of the Texas Register (17 TexReg 6120). The consultant will provide engineering services for the design and construction administration phases for the following TxDOT project: 94-08-051, Pecos Municipal Airport, Fort Stockton. The engineering firm for these services is Parkhill, Smith & Cooper, Inc., 5214 Thomason Drive, Midland, Texas 79703. The total value of the contract is $80,110 and the contract period started on January 12, 1993, until the completion of the project. If there are any questions, please contact Karon Wiedemann, Manager, Grant Administration, Division of Aviation, (512) 476-9262. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 15, 1993. TRD-9317773 Diane L. Northam Legal Administrative Assistant Texas Department of Transportation Filed: January 15, 1993 Sam Houston State University Consultant Contract Award Sam Houston State University (SHSU), in accordance with provisions of Texas Civil Statutes, Article 6252-11c, announces the awarding of a consultant contract to a consulting firm based in Washington, D.C. The solicitation for proposals was published in the November 20, 1992, issue of the Texas Register (17 TexReg 8196). The consultant will represent and assist the university in developing projects deemed important to the university, assist the university in obtaining funding for university projects, and provide consulting and representation as directed by Sam Houston State University. One proposal was received in response to this solicitation for proposals. This proposal was from Bobby Mills/The Advocacy Group, 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 1180, Washington, D.C. 20004. The consultant awarded the contract was Bobby Mills/The Advocacy Group, 1455 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 1180, Washington, D.C. 20004. The consultant contract begins January 1, 1993, and ends June 30, 1993, with the option to renew. The fee estimate is $15,000, excluding expenses, with a total not to exceed $17,000. Reports and documents will be submitted as required. Issued in Huntsville, Texas, on January 11, 1993. TRD-9317615 Dr. B. K. Marks Vice President for Academic Affairs and Student Services Sam Houston State University Filed: January 13, 1993 Texas Water Commission Enforcement Orders Pursuant to the Texas Water Code, which states that if the commission finds that a violation has occurred and a civil penalty is assessed, the commission shall file notice of its decision in the Texas Register not later than the 10th day after the date on which the decision is adopted, the following information is submitted. An enforcement order was issued to the City of El Paso-Sun Metro Public Transit Administration, TWC Facility Identification Number 11418, on January 4, 1993, assessing $124,600 in administrative penalties with a portion deferred. Information concerning any aspect of this order may be obtained by contacting Mark Alvardo, Staff Attorney, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, (512) 908-2055. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 13, 1993. TRD-9317706 Gloria A. Vasquez Notices Coordinator Texas Water Commission Filed: January 14, 1993 Pursuant to the Texas Water Code, which states that if the commission finds that a violation has occurred and a civil penalty is assessed, the commission shall file notice of its decision in the Texas Register not later than the 10th day after the date on which the decision is adopted, the following information is submitted. An enforcement order was issued to the City of Gonzales, MSW Permit Number 1248, on January 11, 1993, assessing $5,040 in administrative penalties. Information concerning any aspect of this order may be obtained by contacting Renea Ryland, Staff Attorney, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, (512) 475-2267. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 13, 1993. TRD-9317707 Gloria A. Vasquez Notices Coordinator Texas Water Commission Filed: January 14, 1993 Pursuant to the Texas Water Code, which states that if the commission finds that a violation has occurred and a civil penalty is assessed, the commission shall file notice of its decision in the Texas Register not later than the 10th day after the date on which the decision is adopted, the following information is submitted. An enforcement order was issued to Spencer Road Public Utility District, Permit Number 11472-01, on January 11, 1993, assessing $12,500 in administrative penalties. Information concerning any aspect of this order may be obtained by contacting Robert Martinez, Staff Attorney, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087, (512) 463-8098. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 13, 1993. TRD-9317704 Gloria A. Vasquez Notices Coordinator Texas Water Commission Filed: January 14, 1993 Notice of Application For Waste Disposal Permit Notice is given by the Texas Water Commission of public notices of waste disposal permit applications issued during the period of January 11-15, 1993. No public hearing will be held on these applications unless an affected person has requested a public hearing. Any such request for a public hearing shall be in writing and contain the name, mailing address, and phone number of the person making the request; and a brief description of how the requester, or persons represented by the requester, would be adversely affected by the granting of the application. If the commission determines that the request sets out an issue which is relevant to the waste discharge permit decision, or that a public hearing would serve the public interest, the commission shall conduct a public hearing, after the issuance of proper and timely notice of the hearing. If no sufficient request for hearing is received within 30 days of the date of publication of notice concerning the applications, the permit will be submitted to the commission for final decision on the application. Information concerning any aspect of these applications may be obtained by contacting the Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711, (512) 463-7906. Listed are the name of the applicant and the city in which the facility is located, type of facility, location of the facility, permit number, and type of application-new permit, amendment, or renewal. City of Benjamin; the wastewater treatment facilities; are south of the City of Benjamin; approximately 3/4 mile south of the intersection of U.S. Highway 82 and State Highway 6 and approximately 800 feet west of State Highway 6 in Knox County; renewal; 11162-01. City of Bonham; the wastewater treatment facilities; are approximately 1/2 mile east of the City of Bonham on Seven Oaks Road in Fannin County; renewal; 10070- 01. Mr. and Mrs. Leroy Brown doing business as Oak Terrace Mobile Home Park; the Oak Terrace Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment Facilities; the plant site is north of Linscomb Road approximately 1/2 mile west of the intersection of Linscomb Road and FM Road 1136; approximately 1 1/2 mile south of the intersection of FM Road 1136 and FM Road 1130 in Orange County; renewal; 11357- 01. Coastal Refining and Marketing, Inc., Houston Asphalt Terminal; an asphalt storage and loading facility; the plant site is one mile east of Wayside Drive on Avenue R, approximately two miles south of Interstate Highway 10, along the Houston Ship Channel in the City of Houston, Harris County; new: 03558. Coastal States Crude Gathering Company, McAllen Terminal and Station; a petroleum refined product storage and loading facility; the plant site is 1/2 mile west of FM Road 2061 on the south side of Las Milpas Road in Hidalgo County; new: 03559. Coastal States Crude Gathering Company, San Antonio Terminal; a petroleum refined product storage and loading facility; the plant site is at 4719 Corner Parkway Number 2, one mile northwest of Interstate Highway 10 and Loop 410 in the City of San Antonio, Bexar County; new: 03550. Conoco, Inc., Mount Pleasant Products Terminal; a petroleum products storage and loading terminal; the plant site is south of FM Road 899 at the west city limits of the City of Mount Pleasant, Titus County; renewal; 02917. Encogen One Partners Limited; the Sweetwater Cogeneration Plant, which produces steam and generates electricity; the plant site is adjacent to the U. S. Gypsum Company Plant, which is adjacent to Highway 80 (Business Route) near the IH 20 intersection, approximately 1.5 miles east of the City of Sweetwater, Nolan County; renewal; 02963. Exxon Corporation, Exxon Chemical Company Division; a plant manufacturing specialty chemicals; the plant site is at 8230 Stedman Street in the City of Houston, Harris County; renewal; 00610. City of Garland; the Newman Electric Plant, which is a steam electric station; the plant site is on the north side of State Highway 66, approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of State Highway 66 and State Highway 78 in the City of Garland, Dallas County; new; 03519. The George Foundation; the wastewater treatment facilities; are approximately 1,500 feet west of the crossing of FM Road 762 and Dry Creek in Fort Bend County; renewal; 12603-01. Cal J. Myers doing business as Wood Gate Mobile Home Village; the wastewater treatment facilities are approximately 1/4 mile west of the intersection of Veterans Memorial Drive and Frick Road on the south side of Frick Road in Harris County; renewal; 12414-01. Praxair, Inc.; from an air separation plant; the plant site is at the southeast corner of the intersection of Old Tidal Road and Port Terminal Railroad about 0.5 mile north of State Highway 225 in the City of Deer Park, Harris County; renewal; 01173. Protestant Episcopal Church of the Diocese of Texas; the wastewater treatment facilities; are approximately 1,500 feet east of FM Road 362, approximately 2,000 feet north of the Waller-Grimes county line in Grimes County; renewal; 11462-01. Roman Forest Consolidated Municipal Utility District; the wastewater treatment facilities; the plant site is approximately 1.7 miles east of U.S. Highway 59 and 1.2 miles north of the intersection of U.S. Highway 59 and FM Road 1485 at 1602 Athens Street in the City of Roman Forest in Montgomery County; new; 13638- 01. The Sabine Mining Company, South Hallsville Mine Number 1; the plant site is south of Hallsville City, bordered on the north by FM Road 968 and Interstate Highway 20 at their intersection and on the south by the Sabine River, in Harrison County; renewal; 02538. Texas Utilities Mining Company, Big Brown Lignite Mine; the Big Brown Lignite Mine; the plant site is within a 20-mile radius of the Big Brown Reservoir (Fairfield Lake) which is approximately one mile east of FM Road 1124 and 11 miles northeast of the City of Fairfield in Freestone County; renewal; 02700. Trifinery, Inc.; a petroleum refinery; the plant site is on property owned by Berry Contracting Company between Up River Road and the Corpus Christi Inner Harbor, and between Valero Refining Company and Texas Fuel and Asphalt Company in the City of Corpus Christi, Nueces County; renewal; 02720. United of Omaha Life Insurance Company; the wastewater treatment facilities; are approximately 4,200 feet south of the intersection of State Highway 105 and Keenan Road and approximately 2,400 feet east of Keenan Road in Montgomery County; renewal; 12440-01. Vancouver Management, Inc.; the White Oak Manor Mobile Home Park Wastewater Treatment Plant; the plant site is approximately 14 miles northwest of the City of Houston central business district, and one mile northeast of U.S. Highway 290 and approximately 500 feet east of Windfern Road on the south bank of Whiteoak Bayou in Harris County; renewal; 11051-01. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 15, 1993. TRD-9317708 Gloria A. Vasquez Chief Clerk Texas Water Commission Filed: January 14, 1993 Notices of Availability and Request for Comments AGENCY: Texas Water Commission (TWC). ACTION: Notice of availability of a proposed regional solid waste management plan and a 30-day period for public comment on the plan. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the document entitled "The 20-Year (1990- 2010) Regional Solid Waste Management Plan for the Capital State Planning Region" is available for public review and comment. Regional solid waste management plans are required by the Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 363 (Comprehensive Municipal Solid Waste Management, Recovery, and Conservation Act, 1990) for each of the established regional planning agencies (councils of governments) in the state, which have been officially designated as solid waste management planning regions. The Capital Area Planning Council (CAPCO) region includes the counties of Bastrop, Blanco, Burnet, Caldwell, Fayette, Hays, Lee, Llano, Travis, and Williamson. The plan describes current solid waste management efforts in the region, assesses problems and needs, and provides recommendations for future action. Immediately upon adoption by the Texas Water Commission, the plan will have rule status. Subchapter O of the Municipal Solid Waste Management Regulations (sec.330.568) will be amended a later date to include, by reference, all adopted regional plans. DATES: The interested public is invited to submit written comments on the proposed regional plan to the Texas Water Commission. Written comments must be received by not later than February 26, 1993. Please address comments to: Daniel J. Eden, Director, Waste Policy Management Division, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the regional plan document are available for public review at the following two locations: Capital Area Planning Council, 2520 IH 35 South, Suite 100, Austin, Texas 78704, (512) 443-7653; Texas Water Commission, Waste Management Policy Division, 12015 Park 35 Circle, Colonnade Building, Fifth Floor, Austin, Texas 78753, (512) 908-6695. The Texas Water Commission will consider adoption of this regional plan at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 3, 1993. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317855 Mary Ruth Holder Director, Legal Division Texas Water Commission Filed: January 20, 1993 AGENCY: Texas Water Commission (TWC). ACTION: Notice of availability of a proposed regional solid waste management plan and a 30-day period for public comment on the plan. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the document entitled "Regional Solid Waste Management Plan for the Heart of Texas Region, 1991-2010" is available for public review and comment. Regional solid waste management plans are required by the Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 363 (Comprehensive Municipal Solid Waste Management, Recovery, and Conservation Act, 1990) for each of the established regional planning agencies (councils of governments) in the state, which have been officially designated as solid waste management planning regions. The Heart of Texas Council of Governments (HOTCOG) region includes the counties of Bosque, Hill, Falls, Freestone, Limestone, and McLennan. The plan describes current solid waste management efforts in the region, assesses problems and needs, and provides recommendations for future action. Immediately upon adoption by the Texas Water Commission, the plan will have rule status. Subchapter O of the Municipal Solid Waste Management Regulations (sec.330.568) will be amended a later date to include, by reference, all adopted regional plans. DATES: The interested public is invited to submit written comments on the proposed regional plan to the Texas Water Commission. Written comments must be received by no later than February 26, 1993. Please address comments to: Daniel J. Eden, Director, Waste Policy Management Division, Texas Water Commission, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the regional plan document are available for public review at the following two locations: Heart of Texas Council of Governments, 320 Franklin Avenue, Waco, Texas 76701-2297, (817) 756-7822; Texas Water Commission, Waste Management Policy Division, 12015 Park 35 Circle, Colonnade Building, Fifth Floor, Austin, Texas 78753, (512) 908-6695. The Texas Water Commission will consider adoption of this regional plan at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 3, 1993. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317856 Mary Ruth Holder Director, Legal Division Texas Water Commission Filed: January 20, 1993 Request for Proposal The Texas Water Commission (TWC) and the Governor's Energy Office seek abstracts preliminary to actual proposals for a joint United States Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grant. The program is National Industrial Competitiveness through Environment, Energy and Economics (NICE-3). Abstracts are hereby solicited for funding for programs which will yield new processes and/or equipment which can significantly reduce generation of highvolume waste in industry and conserve energy and energy- intensive feedstocks. The focus of the grant projects is on simultaneous reduction of industrial energy use, reduction of pollution that is generated by industrial processes, and improvement of process economics. To achieve this goal, TWC will solicit projects that seek to: encourage accelerated industrial development and dissemination of pollution prevention and energy conserving technologies; demonstrate successful industrial applications of innovative waste minimization techniques in conjunction with less polluting, energy-efficient technologies; identify and implement efficiency improvements in processes, materials inputs and waste streams; identify and develop strategies to overcome barriers that currently inhibit waste minimization and energy efficiency techniques and practices in business and industry; enhance industrial competitiveness through the introduction and dissemination of cost-effective waste minimization and energy efficient processes, equipment, and practices. Deadline for abstracts is April 1, 1993. Submitters of successful abstracts will be asked to submit full proposals by April 24, 1992. For more information, call Jeff Voorhis at (512) 475-2187, Office of Pollution Prevention and Conservation, Texas Water Commission. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 20, 1993. TRD-9317854 Mary Ruth Holder Director, Legal Division Texas Water Commission Filed: January 20, 1993 Texas Water Development Board Applications Received Pursuant to the Texas Water Code, sec.6.195, the Texas Water Development Board provides notice of the following applications received by the Board. Rayburn Country Municipal Utility District, P.O. Drawer 100, Sam Rayburn, Texas 75951, received December 7, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $100,000 from the Water Quality Enhancement Account of the Texas Water Development Fund. Sandy Land Underground Water Conservation District, P.O. Box 130, Plains, Texas 79355, received December 18, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $600,000 from the Agricultural Water Conservation Bond Program. City of Canton, P.O. Box 245, Canton, Texas 75103, received December 7, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $2,420,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. City of Bryan, P.O. Box 1000, Bryan, Texas 77805, received November 3, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $1,600,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. Board of Regents of the Texas A&M University System, the Texas A&M University System, College Station, Texas 77843, received December 1, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $5,920,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. Brazoria County Fresh Water Supply District Number 1, P.O. Box 237, Damon, Texas 77430, received November 2, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $500,000 from the Water Supply Account of the Texas Water Development Fund. City of River Oaks, 4900 River Oaks Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76114, received November 16, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $2,215,000 from the Water Supply Account of the Texas Water Development Fund. City of Breckenridge, 209 North Breckenridge Avenue, Breckenridge, Texas 76424, received November 25, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $6,295,000; $4,015,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund and $2,280,000 from the Water Supply Account of the Texas Water Development Fund. Harris County Utility District Number 3; 8 Shorelake Drive, Kingwood, Texas 77339, received November 30, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $2,480,000; $2,260,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund and $220,000 from the Flood Control Account of the Texas Water Development Fund. City of La Coste, P.O. Box 112, La Coste, Texas 78039, received December 3, 1992, application for an increase in financial assistance in the amount of $165,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. City of Wellman, P.O. Box 124, Wellman, Texas 79378, received December 1, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $600,000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. City of Coldspring, P.O. Box 247, Coldspring, Texas 77331-0247, received December 20, 1992, application for financial assistance in the amount of $300, 000 from the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund. North Central Texas Council of Governments, P.O. Drawer COG, Arlington, Texas 76005-5888, received August 28, 1992, application for a flood protection planning grant in an amount not to exceed $425,000 from the Research and Planning Fund. City of Odessa, P.O. Box 4398, Odessa, Texas 79760, received December 23, 1992, application for a water research grant in an amount not to exceed $55, 000 from the Research and Planning Fund. Additional information concerning this matter may be obtained from Craig D. Pedersen, Executive Administrator, P.O. Box 13231, Austin, Texas 78711. Issued in Austin, Texas, on January 13, 1993. TRD-9317611 Craig D. Pedersen Executive Administrator Texas Water Development Board Filed: January 13, 1993