[Federal Register: June 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 125)]
[Notices]
[Page 37071-37072]
[DOCID:fr29jn06-48]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions
To Intervene, Protests, and Comments

June 22, 2006.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:

    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No: 12690-000.
    c. Date filed: June 15, 2006.
    d. Applicant: Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County,
Washington.
    e. Name of Project: Admiralty Inlet Tidal Energy Project.
    f. Location: The project would be located in Admiralty Inlet in the
northwestern portion of Puget Sound, between the Olympic Peninsula and
Whidbey Island, in Jefferson, Kitsap and Island Counties, Washington.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contacts: Mr. Steven Klein, General Manager, P.O. Box
1107, 2320 California Street, Everett, WA 98206,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Chris Yeakel,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed project would consist of:
(1) 450 Tidal In Stream Energy Conversion (TISEC) devices consisting
of, (2) rotating propeller blades 20 meters in diameter, (3) integrated
generators with a capacity of 50 kW, (4) anchoring systems, (5) mooring
lines, and (6) interconnection transmission lines. The project is
estimated to have an annual generation of 146.2 gigawatt-hours per-
year, which would be distributed by the Snohomish County Public Utility
District.
    l. Locations of Applications: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may
also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov

using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Competing Preliminary Permit: Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR
4.30(b) and 4.36.
    o. Competing Development Application: Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
    p. Notice of Intent: A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    q. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit: A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    r. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's web site under ``e-filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
    s. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', ``PROTEST'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'' or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the
particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-
named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number
of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    t. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-10168 Filed 6-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 68 (Thursday, April 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19078-19079]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08092]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC15-109-000.
    Applicants: Bicent Power LLC, Tanner Street Generation, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Request for Expedited Action of Bicent
Power LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5734.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-710-002.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Service Agreement No.
341--Revised Exhibit A to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5201.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1080-001.
    Applicants: Beethoven Wind, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to new to be
effective 2/27/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5236.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/13/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1430-000.
    Applicants: Appalachian Power Company.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Reactive Supply and Voltage Control Amendment to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5488.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1431-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
04-01_PSCo-THRM-IA-114-0.0.0--Filing to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5492.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1432-000.
    Applicants: AEP Generation Resources Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii):
Reactive Supply and Voltage Control Amendment to be effective 6/1/2015.

    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5493.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1433-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Application of Public Service Company of New Mexico
for 2015 Transmission Formula Rate for Post-Retirement Benefits Other
than Pensions.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5505.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1434-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Emera Maine.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): Emera
Maine--Schedule 20A and 21 to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5519.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1435-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
04-01 Perfect Unit Adjustment Filing to be effective 6/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5529.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1436-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy
Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, Inc., Entergy Texas, Inc.,
Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing per 35.1: OpCos Tax--Pension
Costs 205 Filing 4-1-2015 to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5588.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1437-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Texas, Inc., Entergy Gulf States Louisiana,
L.L.C.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): EGSL-
ETI Acquisition Adjustment to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5609.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1438-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): GIA
and Distribution Service Agmt with SunEdison Standard Ave. Santa Ana
Project to be effective 4/3/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1439-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Cancellation GIAs for
Boomer Solar 8 LLC and Boomer Solar 14 LLC to be effective 4/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1440-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Cleco
Power LLC.
    Description: Section 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2015-
04-02_Cleco Power--City of Alexandria, LA JPZ Agreement to be effective
12/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5147.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1441-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 35.15: Notices of Cancellation
and Termination--Service Agreements to be effective 4/3/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5184.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1442-000.
    Applicants: Municipal Energy of PA, LLC.
    Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 Market-Based Rate Tariff
Application to be effective 5/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 4/2/15.
    Accession Number: 20150402-5199.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/15.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following land
acquisition reports:

    Docket Numbers: LA15-1-000.
    Applicants: Lea Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of Lea Power
Partners, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/1/15.
    Accession Number: 20150401-5732.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 2, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-08092 Filed 4-8-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32081-32085]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13841]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1987-0002; FRL-9315-8]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Coker's Sanitation Service
Landfills Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III is
publishing a direct final Deletion of the Coker's Sanitation Service
Landfills Superfund Site (Site) located in Cheswold, Kent County,
Delaware, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final deletion is being published
by EPA with the concurrence of the State of Delaware, through the
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
(DNREC), because EPA has determined that all appropriate response
actions under CERCLA, other than operation, maintenance, and five-year
reviews, have been completed. However, this deletion does not preclude
future actions under Superfund.

DATES: This direct final deletion is effective August 2, 2011 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by July 5, 2011. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final
deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that the deletion
will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1987-0002, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov . Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Darius Ostrauskas, Remedial Project Manager, U.S.
EPA<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attn: Darius Ostrauskas
     Mail: Darius Ostrauskas, Remedial Project Manager (3HS23),
U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
     Hand delivery: Darius Ostrauskas, Remedial Project Manager
(3HS23), U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-
2029. Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>, Business Hours: Monday through Friday--9 a.m.
to 4 p.m. Such deliveries are accepted only during the Docket's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1987-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:

U.S. EPA Region III, Library, 2nd Floor, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Monday through Friday 8
a.m. to 5 p.m.
The Dover Public Library, Reference Department, 45 South State Street,
Dover, DE 19901,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 9
p.m., Friday and Saturday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m. to 5
p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darius Ostrauskas, Remedial Project
Manager (3HS23), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action

I. Introduction

    EPA Region III is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion
of the Coker's Sanitation Service Landfills Superfund Site from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40
CFR part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to
section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL
as the list of sites that appear to present a significant risk to
public health, welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be the
subject of remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance
Superfund (Fund). As described in 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP,
sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial
actions if future conditions warrant such actions.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective August 2, 2011 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by July 5, 2011. Along with this direct final
Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent to Delete
in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register. If adverse
comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this
deletion action, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct
final Notice of Deletion before the effective date of the deletion and
the deletion will not take effect.

EPA will, as appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to
Delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional
opportunity to comment.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Coker's Sanitation Service
Landfills Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion
criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the
NPL unless adverse comments are received during the public comment
period.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
    iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    (1) EPA consulted with the State of Delaware prior to developing
this direct final Notice of Deletion and the Notice of Intent to Delete
the Site co-published today in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the
Federal Register.
    (2) EPA has provided the State 30 working days for review of this
notice and the parallel Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their
publication today, and the State, through DNREC, has concurred on the
deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final Notice
of Deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel Notice of
Intent to Delete is being published in a major local newspaper, the
Delaware State News. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public
comment period concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from
the NPL.
    (4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories
identified above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely
notice of withdrawal of this direct final Notice of Deletion before its
effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to
Delete and the comments already received.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL:

Site Background and History

    The Site (EPA Identification Number DED980704860) is located near
Cheswold in Kent County, Delaware, approximately six miles northwest of
the City of Dover. The Site consists of two landfills located
approximately one-half mile apart on opposite sides of County Road 152.
Landfill No. 1, which is on the north side of County Road 152, and
Landfill No. 2, which is on the south side of County Road 152, are both
part of larger, heavily wooded tracts of land. Both landfills are
fenced off and covered with vegetation. There are no known development
plans for the properties occupied by the landfills. Properties adjacent
to both landfills are primarily used for agricultural or light
residential development. Landfill No. 1 is bordered on the north by a
forested wetland that includes a shallow meandering stream, the Willis
Branch of the Leipsic River. Agricultural lands border the tree lines
east and west of Landfill No. 2. Deer and other wildlife populate this
area of Kent County. Groundwater near the Site is used for domestic
purposes, including drinking water.
    Landfill No. 1 is located on property owned by Alberta F. Schmidt.
Use of Landfill No. 1 began in 1969 under a permit issued by the
Delaware Water and Air Resources Commission. DNREC issued subsequent
permits (1973-1976). The landfill was closed in 1977 in accordance with
the Delaware Solid Waste Disposal Regulations of August 1974. During
landfill operation, latex waste sludge was discharged into unlined
trenches that were six to eight feet deep and twelve feet wide. Liquids
were allowed to drain off as solids settled. Trenches were then
backfilled with soil obtained locally.
    Landfill No. 2, located on property owned by Kowinsky Farms, Inc.,
was operated from 1976 to 1980 under a state permit. The permit
required each six-foot deep, twenty-eight foot wide, one hundred
twenty-five foot long trench to have a synthetic liner. The permit also
required leachate collection, installation of groundwater monitoring
wells, regularly scheduled site inspections, and periodic groundwater
and leachate monitoring. When the Site was closed in 1980, all trenches
were capped with two feet of native soil. As waste settled and no
longer generated collectable quantities of leachate, the leachate
collection was phased out in the early 1980's.
    EPA conducted an initial Site Investigation in 1980, and a second
one in 1983. Elevated levels of acrolein were found in one well and in
one leachate collection pipe on Landfill No. 2. Ethylbenzene was
detected in the same well and leachate collection pipe. Bis(2-
chloroethyl) ether was detected in Landfill No. 1 leachate seeps. The
Site was proposed for inclusion on the NPL in the Federal Register on
April 10, 1985 (50 FR 14115), and included on the NPL in the Federal
Register on July 22, 1987 (52 FR 27620).

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    In April 1986, EPA issued letters to several Potentially
Responsible Parties (PRPs) notifying them of their potential liability
for Site response actions and inviting them to conduct the RI/FS. On
December 30, 1987, three PRPs signed an agreement with EPA in the form
of an Administrative Order on Consent to conduct the RI/FS.
    Media investigation during the RI/FS included waste, leachate,
groundwater, surface water and sediment, soil, and air. Among the
different media types investigated, waste contained the highest number
of contaminants at the highest levels for styrene, ethylbenzene, and
phenolic compounds. Leachate from Landfill No. 2 (taken from leachate
collection trenches within the lined cells) contained the same
contaminants, but at lower levels. The waste and leachate were
determined to pose a threat to human health and the environment.
Groundwater at both landfills contained similar compounds but at
significantly lower levels, and it was determined that they did not
pose a threat to human health or the environment.
    The FS provided an in-depth analysis of the following potential
remedial alternatives: (1) No Action; (2) Monitoring; (3) Limited
Action; (4) Soil Cap; (5) Multi-Layer Cap (both landfills) and Sub-
drain (Landfill No. 1 only); (6) Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)
Stripping by Aeration ; and (7) On-site Incineration (of Waste). The FS
also analyzed EPA and DNREC's preferred alternative, alternative 3. The
parties agreed, under a separate order, to remove drums containing
varying quantities of latex waste found on-site during the RI.

Selected Remedy

    EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Site on September 28,
1990. Under the ROD, the remedial action objective was to reduce the
potential for future contact with waste at the Site and thereby reduce
risk to within EPA guidelines.
    The waste materials found in the landfills at the Site are neither
liquid nor highly mobile, and can be controlled reliably in place. The
Site contains a large volume of material that would be difficult to
handle and treat due to clay-like physical properties and the potential
risk posed by substantial release of volatile organic compounds. EPA
and DNREC determined that on-site containment of the waste was an
appropriate remedial action.
    The selected remedy addresses the principal threats posed by the
conditions at the Site by reducing the potential for human exposure to
wastes remaining at the Site. The major components of the selected
remedy are as follows:
     Land use restrictions placed on both landfill properties.
     The entire waste disposal areas of both landfills are
enclosed by a chain-link security fence with a locked gate to restrict
the access of unauthorized persons and equipment onto the landfills.
Appropriate warning signs are placed along the fence.
     Cover material was placed along the northern slope of
Landfill No. 1 to eliminate exposure to leachate seeps.
     Areas of Landfill No. 2, which had subsided due to uneven
settling of waste, were backfilled to grade and seeded.
     Leachate collection wells at Landfill No. 2 were sealed
with grout to reduce the potential for direct contact with leachate.
     Groundwater was initially sampled semi-annually at both
landfills; now, it is sampled at least once every five years.
     The landfills are inspected semi-annually.
     Surface water monitoring was conducted at the Willis
Branch adjacent to
    Landfill No. 1 at the same time as groundwater monitoring for a
period of no less than five years. In response to monitoring
requirements identified in the ROD, a groundwater and surface water
monitoring program has been implemented at the Site. This monitoring
program has included the identification of trigger levels for
contaminants of concern for groundwater and surface water for both
Landfill No.1 and Landfill No. 2. The trigger levels for Landfill No. 1
were developed primarily for the protection of aquatic wildlife due to
the proximity of the Willis Branch and lack of potential human
receptors. For Landfill No. 2, the trigger levels were developed to
protect human health due to the proximity of nearby residential wells.
Those levels are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Landfill No. 1  Landfill No. 2
         Contaminant of concern               [mu]g/L         [mu]g/L
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Groundwater:
    Styrene.............................            2900             100
    Ethylbenzene........................            3200               5
    1,2,3-trichloropropane..............  ..............               5
    Phenolics...........................  ..............           22999
    Antimony............................  ..............               6
Surface Water:
    Styrene.............................            1400  ..............
    Ethylbenzene........................            1600  ..............
    Xylenes.............................             900  ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response Actions

    The following is a summary of the activities that were completed at
the Site.
     An Environmental Protection Easement and Declaration of
Restrictive Covenants between Alberta Schmidt, as Grantor, and DNREC,
on behalf of the State of Delaware, as Grantee, relating to Landfill
No. 1 was signed on February 24, 2005. The document was recorded with
the Office of the Recorder of Deeds for Kent County, Delaware on April
18, 2005, to implement the institutional controls (land use
restrictions) for Landfill No. 1.
     An Environmental Protection Easement and Declaration of
Restrictive Covenants between Kowinsky Farms, Inc, as Grantor, and
DNREC, on behalf of the State of Delaware, as Grantee, relating to
Landfill No. 2 was signed on September 24, 2008. The document was
recorded with the Office of the Recorder of Deeds for Kent County,
Delaware on November 26, 2008, to implement the institutional controls
(land use restrictions) for Landfill No. 2.
     On April 8, 1992, the PRPs entered into a Consent Decree
with EPA pursuant to which the PRPs agreed to implement the remedy
selected in the ROD. The PRPs started construction activities in early
July 1993.
     Remedial construction activities at Landfill No.1
consisted of clearing the

perimeter of vegetation so that the security fence could be installed.
Leachate seeps were covered with wood chip mulch. Following
installation of the security fence, cleared areas were seeded. Lastly,
warning signs were posted around the landfill perimeter.
     At Landfill No. 2, remedial construction activities were
more extensive. First, the landfill was cleared of all vegetation.
Trees within the landfill perimeter were cut and chipped for mulch.
Each waste cell's leachate collection system was grout sealed. Settled
waste cells were filled with clean fill and the entire landfill surface
was re-graded. Top soil was added; the landfill was then graded and
seeded. A security fence was installed around the landfill. Finally,
warning signs were placed around the landfill perimeter.
     Three wells were sampled at Landfill No. 1 and four at
Landfill No. 2. The sampling parameters were ethylbenzene, styrene,
1,2,3-trichloropropane, antimony, and phenolics, as well as field
parameters. Groundwater was sampled semi-annually in 1993 and 1994, and
then annually through 1998. During this period, all sampling results
for contaminants of concern were below established trigger levels for
both Landfill No. 1 and Landfill No. 2, as well as Maximum Contaminant
Levels (MCLs) established under the Safe Drinking Water Act. In 1999,
EPA determined that the subject monitoring could be discontinued. In
2009, the monitoring resumed at a frequency of at least once every five
years. Sampling in 2009 found that all contaminants of concern were
below the established trigger levels and MCLs.
     The Site has been inspected regularly as required in the
ROD and routine maintenance activities have been performed as needed.
The routine maintenance activities have generally consisted of minor
fence repair, replacement of warning signs, and mowing the surface of
Landfill No. 2.
    On September 9, 1993, EPA and DNREC conducted the final
construction inspection. On September 29, 1993, EPA signed the
Preliminary Site Close Out Report (PCOR), which documented that the
PRPs had completed construction activities at the Site. EPA signed the
Final Close Out Report on February 19, 2009, which documented
completion of all response action, other than operation, maintenance,
and five-year reviews.

Cleanup Goals

    EPA approved the Sampling and Analysis Plan (Part IV of the
Remedial Design Submittal) requiring periodic sampling of groundwater,
surface water and sediments. Sampling under the subject Plan was
initiated at the start of remedial action (RA) activities and continued
for six years. During that time, the monitored contaminants of concern
at Landfill No.1 and Landfill No. 2 were well below identified trigger
levels. In response to the results of this monitoring, the First Five-
Year Review for the Site issued by EPA in 1999 found that monitoring of
groundwater and surface water at the Site could be discontinued.
However, during the preparation and completion of the Final Close Out
Report for the Site in February 2009, EPA determined that monitoring
should resume and be conducted at a minimum of once every five years
because waste has been left in place at the Site.

Operation and Maintenance (O&M)

    The landfills are inspected semi-annually to identify any
maintenance activities that need to be conducted to ensure continued
performance of the RA. Inspection frequency was quarterly for the first
year to provide for seep cover inspection and maintenance. The EPA-
approved O&M Plan presented the requirements for the Site inspections,
and included a checklist that was used to document inspection
observations and results. O&M began following EPA's certification that
the RA activities were completed. O&M activities that will continue at
the Site are mowing and semi-annual inspections. Also, because waste
remains onsite, groundwater and surface water monitoring will be
performed once every five years.
    An Environmental Protection Easement and Declaration of Restrictive
Covenants between Alberta Schmidt, as Grantor, and DNREC, on behalf of
the State of Delaware, as Grantee, relating to Landfill No.1 was signed
on February 24, 2005. The document was recorded with the Office of the
Recorder of Deeds for Kent County, Delaware on April 18, 2005, to
implement the institutional controls for Landfill No. 1.
    An Environmental Protection Easement and Declaration of Restrictive
Covenants between Kowinsky Farms, Inc, as Grantor, and DNREC, on behalf
of the State of Delaware, as Grantee, relating to Landfill No. 2 was
signed on September 24, 2008. The document was recorded with the Office
of the Recorder of Deeds for Kent County, Delaware on November 26,
2008, to implement institutional controls for Landfill No. 2.
    The implemented institutional controls (land use restrictions) for
both Landfill No. 1 and Landfill No. 2 prohibit disturbance of the
onsite containment remedies.

Five-Year Review

    EPA has conducted three (3) statutory Five-Year Reviews for this
Site. Since the remedies selected for the Site allow hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants to remain onsite above levels
that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, statutory Five-
Year Reviews are required. These reviews are conducted pursuant to
CERCLA Section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), and as provided in the
current guidance on Five-Year Reviews.
    The first Five-Year Review for the Site was completed on January 6,
1999, and the second Five-Year Review was completed on May 25, 2004.
Both of these Five-Year Reviews found the remedy to be not fully
protective due to the need for institutional controls in both cases.
    The most recent Five-Year Review was completed on May 22, 2009.
With the implementation of institutional controls, this Five-Year
Review found no issues that affected the current or future
protectiveness of the remedy for the Site and concluded that the remedy
at the Site is protective over the short term and the long term.
    The next Five-Year Review will be completed by May 25, 2014.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42
U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for
recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public
in the information repositories.
    Before the start of construction activities, representatives of the
PRPs visited residents whose homes were adjacent to the landfills on
both sides of County Road 152. Residents who were at home at the time
of the visit were informed of the start date and the nature and
duration of the construction activities. The PRP representatives
answered questions that the residents asked about the construction
activities. Fact sheets advising the residents of the construction
activities were given to residents in person or were placed in their
mailboxes. EPA issued a fact sheet in July 1993, at about midway
through the construction activities. The fact sheet presented a
description of the Site remedial action and project status.
    EPA notified local officials about upcoming Five-Year Reviews. EPA
placed notices in the Delaware State News to inform the public that the
Five-Year Reviews were being conducted and when the findings of each
would be available.

Determination That the Criteria for Deletion Have Been Met

    No further response action under CERCLA is appropriate. EPA has
determined based on the investigations conducted that all appropriate
response actions required have been implemented at the Site. Through
the third Five-Year Review, EPA has also determined that the remedy is
considered protective of human health and the environment and,
therefore, additional remedial measures are not necessary. Other
procedures required by 40 CFR 300.425(e) are detailed in Section III of
this direct Final Notice of Deletion.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence dated September 16, 2010, of the State of
Delaware, through DNREC, has determined that all appropriate response
actions under CERCLA, other than operation, maintenance, and five-year
reviews, have been completed. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from
the NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, EPA
is taking it without prior publication. This action will be effective
August 2, 2011 unless EPA receives adverse comments by July 5, 2011. If
adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final Notice of
Deletion before the effective date of the deletion, and it will not
take effect. EPA will prepare a response to comments and continue with
the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to Delete and
the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity
to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

     Dated: April 29, 2011.
James W. Newsom,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
    For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is
amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923, 3 CFR 1987 Comp., p.193.

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing ``DE'',
``Coker's Sanitation Service Landfills'', ``Kent County''.

[FR Doc. 2011-13841 Filed 6-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87922-87924]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29218]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-9-000]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Wisconsin South Expansion
Project, and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Wisconsin South Expansion
Project (Project) involving replacement and expansion of existing
aboveground facilities by ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) in the area west
and southwest of

Lake Michigan. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making
process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. You can make a difference by providing us with
your specific comments or concerns about the project. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they
need to evaluate in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and
properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission
receives them in Washington, DC, on or before December 29, 2016.
    If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the
opening of this docket on November 3, 2016, you will need to file those
comments in Docket No. CP17-9-000 to ensure they are considered as part
of this proceeding.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if
the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the
right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with
state law.
    ANR provided landowners within 0.5 mile of proposed expansion
facilities with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An
Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?''
This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions,
including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the
Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on the FERC
Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at
(202) 502-8258 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' If you are filing a comment on a particular project,
please select ``Comment on a Filing'' as the filing type; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP17-9-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    ANR is proposing to expand ANR's delivery by 230,950 dekatherms per
day (Dth/d), into the Northern Illinois and Wisconsin market areas by
modifying five existing ANR facilities, to meet growing natural gas
demand and enhance ANR's system reliability in Northern Illinois and
Wisconsin.
    The Project would consist of the following facilities:
    1. Install one new 6,130-horsepower (HP) Solar Centaur 50
compressor unit and appurtenant facilities at ANR's existing Sandwich
Compressor Station in Kendall County, Illinois;
    2. increase capacity of the existing Hampshire Meter Station in
Kane County, Illinois from the current 300 million cubic feet per day
(MMCFD) to 500 MMCFD;
    3. replace the existing 0.54-mile Line 332 Lateral located in Kane
County, Illinois, which originates at the Hampshire Meter Station;
    4. increase capacity of ANR's existing Tiffany East Meter Station
in Rock County, Wisconsin from the current 118 MMCFD to 237 MMCFD; and
    5. Re-stage an existing Saturn 10 turbine compressor unit at ANR's
Kewaskum Compressor Station in Sheboygan County, Wisconsin.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Most of the Project impacts would occur within existing facilities
in areas that have been previously disturbed or are currently in
agricultural use. A total of 56.23 acres would be used as construction
workspace, of which 46.30 acres are existing permanent easement and
9.45 acres would be restored to pre-existing conditions after
construction is completed. Approximately 0.16 acres would be converted
to new permanent easement at the Hampshire Meter Station and 0.32 acres
would be converted to new permanent easement for the Line 332 Lateral
Replacement.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species;
     public safety; and
     cumulative impacts
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or

portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or
avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record through eLibrary. Depending on
the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish
and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We
will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations
to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and
address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the
Public Participation section, beginning on page [2].
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\3\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office. (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\4\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project
develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum
encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include
construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor
stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will document our
findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status
of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If we publish and distribute the EA, copies of the EA will be sent
to the environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you
would prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the ``Document-less Intervention Guide'' under the ``e-filing'' link on
the Commission's Web site. Motions to intervene are more fully
described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP17-
9-000). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: November 29, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-29218 Filed 12-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44363-44365]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19943]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0103; Product Identifier 2016-SW-086-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Agusta S.p.A. Model AB139 and Model AW139 helicopters. This proposed AD
would require inspecting the thickness of the tail gearbox (TGB)
central housing (housing). This proposed AD is prompted by reports that
the housing thickness does not conform to its type design. The actions
of this proposed AD are intended to detect and correct an unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 21,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0103; or in person at the Docket Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

    For service information identified in this proposed rule, contact
Leonardo S.p.A., Matteo Ragazzi, Head of Airworthiness, Viale G.Agusta
520, 21017 C.Costa di Samarate (Va) Italy; telephone +39-0331-711756;
fax +39-0331-229046; or at http://www.leonardocompany.com/-/bulletins.
You may review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2016-0246, dated December 13,
2016, to correct an unsafe condition for Leonardo S.p.A. (formerly
Finmeccanica S.p.A. and Agusta S.p.A.) Model AB139 and Model AW139
helicopters.
    EASA advises that the thickness of some sections of the housing do
not conform to the type design. According to EASA, this condition, if
not detected and corrected, could lead to premature cracks in the
housing, resulting in failure of the tail gear rotor transmission and
reduced control of the helicopter. The EASA AD consequently requires a
one-time inspection to determine the thickness of the housing wall, and
depending on the findings, replacing the housing or TGB assembly with
an airworthy part.
    The FAA is in the process of updating Agusta S.p.A.'s name change
to Leonardo S.p.A. on its FAA type certificate. Because this name
change is not yet effective, this AD specifies Agusta S.p.A. as the
type certificate holder.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, EASA, its technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in its AD. We are
proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant information
and determined that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Leonardo Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-274, dated
September 14, 2016 (BT 139-274), which specifies procedures for a
dimensional check of the housing or TGB to determine the thickness of
the housing wall. For housings with fewer than 7,500 flight hours, BT
139-274 specifies compliance with the dimensional check by measurement
during the next repair or overhaul, and replacing the housing if it
does not meet its thickness requirement. For housings with 7,500 or
more flight hours, BT 139-274 specifies compliance with the dimensional
check by ultrasonic inspection within 300 flight hours, and replacing
the TGB if it does not meet its thickness requirement. BT 139-274
excludes certain serial-numbered housings from the applicability
because they were inspected before delivery to customers.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require the following:
     If a housing has fewer than 7,500 hours time-in-service
(TIS), before reaching 7,500 hours TIS, inspecting the housing wall to
determine the thickness and replacing the housing if the thickness is
less than 2.65 mm (0.104 inch).
     If a housing has 7,500 or more hours TIS, within 300 hours
TIS, ultrasonic inspecting the TGB to determine the thickness and
replacing the TGB if the thickness is less than 2.65 mm (0.104 inch).

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    If a housing has fewer than 7,500 hours TIS, the EASA AD requires a
dimensional inspection of the housing wall at a helicopter's first
return to a shop or service station for a TGB overhaul or repair after
the EASA AD's effective date but no later than 7,500 hours TIS. This
proposed AD would require such an inspection only before reaching 7,500
hours TIS.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 103 helicopters of
U.S. Registry and that labor costs average $85 per work-hour. Based on
these estimates, we expect the following costs:
     Measuring the thickness of the housing would require .5
work-hour and no parts would be needed for a cost of $43 per
helicopter.
     Ultrasonic inspecting the thickness of the housing would
require 2 work-hours and no parts would be needed for a cost of $170
per helicopter.
     Replacing the TGB housing would require 5 work-hours, and
parts would cost $11,185 for a cost of $11,610 per helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

    Agusta S.p.A.: Docket No. FAA-2017-0103; Product Identifier
2016-SW-086-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Agusta S.p.A. Model AB139 and Model AW139
helicopters, certificated in any category, with a tail gearbox (TGB)
assembly part number (P/N) 3T6522A00239, 3T6522A00242, 3T6522A00243,
or 3T6522A00246 that has a central housing P/N 3T6522A05144 or
3T6522A05146, all serial numbers except those listed in Table 1 of
Leonardo Helicopters Bollettino Technico No. 139-274, dated
September 14, 2016.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as nonconforming thickness
in a section of a TGB central housing, which can lead to a crack in
the TGB central housing. This condition could result in the failure
of the tail gear rotor transmission and loss of helicopter control.

(c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 21, 2017.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) For helicopters with a TGB central housing with less than
7,500 hours time-in-service (TIS), before accumulating 7500 hours
TIS, measure the thickness of the central housing in accordance with
the Compliance Instructions, Part I paragraphs 1 and 2, of
Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-274, dated September 14, 2016 (BT 139-
274). If the thickness is less than 2.65 mm (0.104 inch), replace
the TGB central housing before further flight.
    (2) For helicopters with a TGB central housing with 7500 or more
hours TIS, within 300 hours TIS, ultrasonic inspect the TGB in
accordance with the Compliance Instructions, Part II paragraphs 4
through 4.5 of BT 139-274. If the thickness is less than 2.65 mm
(0.104 inch), replace the TGB before further flight.
    (3) After the effective date of this AD, do not install a
central housing P/N 3T6522A05144 or 3T6522A05146, all serial numbers
except those listed in Table 1 of BT 139-274, on any helicopter
unless it has passed inspection in accordance with paragraph (e)(1)
of this AD.

(f) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, FAA, may approve
AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Matt Fuller, Senior
Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft
Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, TX 76177;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2016-0246, dated December 13, 2016. You may
view the EASA AD on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov in
the AD Docket.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6720, Tail Rotor
Control System.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 11, 2017.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-19943 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34909]
[DOCID:fr16jn06-83]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AC06-153-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Restatement
of Financial Statements

June 9, 2006.
    Take notice that on April 11, 2006, Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
Corporation (Transco) notified the Commission, by letter, of its intent
to restate financial statements for 2004. Transco states that the
restatement is to correct an error related to methodology used to
calculate the average cost of its natural gas inventory. Transco states
that it intends to file its revised 2004 Form 2, containing restated
financial statements for the years 2003 and 2004. Transco further
states that it also intends to record the adjustment applicable to
periods prior to 2003 in Account 439, Adjustments to Retain Earnings.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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 notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on June 23, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-9398 Filed 6-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P