[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 136 (Friday, July 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 46160]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16755]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of The Secretary

Application of Rectrix Aviation, Inc. for Commuter Authority

AGENCY: Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause (Order 2016-7-6) DOT-OST-2016-
0015.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is directing all interested
persons to show cause why it should not issue an order tentatively
finding Rectrix Aviation, Inc., fit, willing, and able to provide
scheduled passenger service as a commuter air carrier using small
aircraft pursuant to Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

DATES: Persons wishing to file objections should do so no later than
July 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to objections should be filed in
Docket DOT-OST-2016-0015 and addressed to U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations (M-30, Room W12-140), 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590, and
should be served upon the parties listed in Attachment A to the order.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Venk Paluvai, Office of Aviation
Analysis (X-53, Room W86-497), U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 8, 2016.
Jenny T. Rosenberg,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-16755 Filed 7-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 197 (Thursday, October 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62002-62003]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24433]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2000-7257; Notice No. 76]

Railroad Safety Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY:  Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Announcement of Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC)
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: FRA announces the fiftieth meeting of the RSAC, a Federal
Advisory Committee that develops railroad safety regulations through a
consensus process. The RSAC meeting topics will include opening remarks
from the FRA Administrator, and status reports will be provided by the
Train Crew Size, Securement, Hazardous Material Issues, Fatigue
Management, Rail Failure, and Risk Reduction Working Groups. Status
reports will also be provided by the Engineering Task Force. This
agenda is subject to change, including the possible addition of further
proposed tasks under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008.

DATES: The RSAC meeting is scheduled to commence at 9:30 a.m. on
Thursday, October 31, 2013, and will adjourn by 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The RSAC meeting will be held at the National Housing Center
located at 1201 15th Street NW., Washington, DC 20005. The meeting is
open to the public on a first-come, first-served basis, and is
accessible to individuals with disabilities. Sign and oral
interpretation can be made available if requested 10 calendar days
before the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Woolverton, RSAC Administrative
Officer/Coordinator, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mailstop 25,
Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Robert Lauby, Deputy Associate
Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative Operations, FRA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), FRA is giving notice of a
meeting of the RSAC. The RSAC was established

to provide advice and recommendations to FRA on railroad safety
matters. The RSAC is composed of 60 voting representatives from 39
member organizations, representing various rail industry perspectives.
In addition, there are non-voting advisory representatives from the
agencies with railroad safety regulatory responsibility in Canada and
Mexico, the National Transportation Safety Board, and the Federal
Transit Administration. The diversity of the Committee ensures the
requisite range of views and expertise necessary to discharge its
responsibilities. See the RSAC Web site for details on prior RSAC
activities and pending tasks at: http://rsac.fra.dot.gov/. Please refer
to the notice published in the Federal Register on March 11, 1996 (61
FR 9740), for additional information about the RSAC.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 7, 2013.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-24433 Filed 10-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 81 (Friday, April 26, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17762-17768]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08156]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0144; FRL-9992-63--Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Removal of Allegheny County Requirements Applicable to
Motor Gasoline Volatility in the Allegheny County Portion of the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on behalf of the Allegheny County Health
Department (ACHD), on March 19, 2019. This revision seeks removal from
the Pennsylvania SIP of Allegheny County requirements limiting
summertime gasoline volatility to 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) Reid
Vapor Pressure (RVP), which were originally adopted to

reduce ozone precursor pollution to address nonattainment of the 1-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Allegheny
County portion of the Pittsburgh-Beavery Valley ozone nonattainment
area (hereafter referred to as the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area). In
December 2018, EPA issued a final approval of the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection's (PA DEP) request to remove
from the SIP the PA DEP requirements limiting the summer RVP of
gasoline in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area. As part of that action,
EPA also approved the accompanying demonstration prepared by
Pennsylvania that shows that the emission impacts from removal of the
program will not interfere with the area's ability to attain or
maintain any NAAQS. EPA is proposing that this prior approved
noninterference demonstration also serves to support Pennsylvania's
request to remove the separate program imposed by Allegheny County
requiring summer 7.8 psi RVP gasoline and that removal of this
substantially similar, local low-RVP program will not interfere with
the area's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS. This action is
being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 28, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2019-0144 to http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section. For the
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, Planning and
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air and Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2176. Mr. Rehn can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we refer to EPA. This supplementary
information section of this action is arranged as follows:

I. Background
    A. Federal Gasoline Volatility Controls Under the CAA
    B. History of State and Local Gasoline Volatility Controls
Applicable to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area
II. What Prompted ACHD to suspend gasoline locally adopted
volatility requirements applicable to Allegheny County?
    A. Pennsylvania Legislature Directs PA DEP To Suspend State
Gasoline Volatility Controls Applicable to the Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley Area
    B. ACHD Amendment of Allegheny County Gasoline Volatility
Requirements Rule To Suspend Local RVP Requirements Applicable to
Allegheny County
III. What is the Historic Reason for Adoption of Gasoline Volatility
Control and the Status of Air Quality in the Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley Area?
    A. The Status of the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area With Respect
to the Ozone NAAQS
    B. The Status of the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area With Respect
to the Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the Commonwealth's submittal?
V. Impacts on the Boutique Fuels List
VI. What Action is EPA taking?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. Federal Gasoline Volatility Controls Under the CAA

    Under section 211(c) of the CAA, EPA promulgated regulations on
March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868) that set maximum Federal limits for the
RVP of gasoline sold during regulatory control periods that were
established on a state-by-state basis in the final rule. The regulatory
control periods applied during the summer months when peak ozone
concentrations were expected. That rule, referred to as Federal Phase I
RVP standards, constituted the first phase of a two-phase nationwide
program that was designed to reduce the volatility of commercial
gasoline during the high ozone season. Depending on the state and
month, Federal Phase I gasoline RVP was not to exceed 10.5 psi, 9.5
psi, or 9.0 psi between calendar years 1989 through 1991. On June 11,
1990 (55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent Phase II Federal
gasoline volatility standards. These requirements established maximum
RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi, depending on the state location
and the area's initial ozone attainment designation with respect to the
1-hour ozone NAAQS. Phase II was applicable starting in 1992 and
remains in effect, except in areas that have more stringent SIP-
approved RVP control programs in place. These Federal volatility
regulations are codified at 40 CFR 80.27, with the delineation between
areas designated as Federal 9.0 psi RVP volatility attainment areas
codified at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2)(i), and those areas designated as
Federal 7.8 psi RVP volatility nonattainment areas at 40 CFR
80.27(a)(2)(ii).
    The 1990 amendments to the CAA established a new section, 211(h),
to address fuel volatility. Section 211(h)(1) requires EPA to
promulgate regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale,
dispense, supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into
commerce gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the
high ozone season. Section 211(h)(2) prohibits EPA from establishing a
volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area,
except that the Agency may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in
any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    Under Federal Phase II gasoline volatility requirements, which were
promulgated December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to make them consistent with section 211(h). The
modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline, beginning in
1992, with RVP above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for
ozone. Under the revised Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990
(55 FR 23658), areas are subject to either a 9.0 psi RVP standard, or
to a newly added 7.8 psi ozone season limitation applicable to some
states.
    Under these Federal Phase II RVP requirements, the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania was required to meet a Federal 9.0 psi RVP standard during
the summer RVP control period--except for the Philadelphia Area, which
was at that time was designated as severe ozone nonattainment and as
such was subject to more stringent gasoline requirements of the
reformulated gasoline program established under CAA section 211(k).

    However, Pennsylvania and Allegheny County were later granted a
Federal ``preemption waiver'' under authority of CAA section
211(c)(4)(C), which allows a state to adopt their own more stringent,
state-specific fuel program (or ``boutique'' fuel program) as part of
the Federally-approved SIP. It was this Federal fuel preemption waiver
that enabled Pennsylvania (and Allegheny County) to adopt a more
stringent gasoline volatility program in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
area, as described in more detail in this rulemaking action.

B. History of State and Local Gasoline Volatility Controls Applicable
to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area

    On November 15, 1990, the CAA amendments of 1990 were signed into
law. On November 6, 1991, EPA designated and classified the Pittsburgh-
Beaver Valley Area as moderate nonattainment for the 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, which included: Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette,
Washington, and Westmoreland Counties. As one of a number of measures
aimed to bring the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area into ozone attainment,
Pennsylvania adopted (among other measures) gasoline RVP limits,
through separate but substantially similar PA DEP and ACHD rules
limiting summertime gasoline volatility in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area to 7.8 psi RVP. PA DEP initially adopted a gasoline RVP limit rule
in the November 1, 1997 Pennsylvania Bulletin (27 Pa.B. 5601, effective
November 1, 1997), which is codified in Subchapter C of Chapter 126 of
the Pennsylvania Code of Regulations (25 Pa. Code Chapter 126,
Subchapter C). On April 17, 1998, Pennsylvania submitted this state-
adopted rule to EPA as a formal revision to its approved SIP. EPA
approved Pennsylvania's RVP SIP revision in the June 8, 1998 Federal
Register (63 FR 31116) and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations
at 40 CFR 52.2020(c)(1).
    As the local air pollution control agency for Allegheny County, the
ACHD subsequently adopted a substantially similar summertime gasoline
volatility limit rule (Allegheny County Order No. 16782, Article XXI,
sections 2102.40, 2105.90, and 2107.15; effective May 15, 1998, amended
August 12, 1999). On March 23, 2000, PA DEP formally submitted a SIP
revision to EPA (on behalf of ACHD) to incorporate ACHD's gasoline RVP
summertime requirements identified above into the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA
approved that SIP revision, establishing an independent ACHD gasoline
RVP limit, on April 17, 2001 (66 FR 19724), effective June 18, 2001.
    PA DEP amended its RVP limit rule in April 2017 to suspend
summertime gasoline RVP limits, formerly applicable to all seven
counties in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area.\1\ ACHD subsequently
revised its own RVP limit rule (Article XXI, Sec. Sec.  2105.90, and
2107.15 of the Rules and Regulations of the Allegheny County Health
Department; amended February 21, 2019, effective March 3, 2019),
suspending applicability of ACHD's RVP requirements upon the effective
date of EPA's removal of the revised Article XXI sections from the
Allegheny County portion of the Pennsylvania SIP. On March 19, 2019, PA
DEP submitted this SIP revision (on behalf of ACHD) to EPA to request
removal of the ACHD's RVP rule requirements from the Pennsylvania SIP.
This request to remove the ACHD RVP program requirements from the SIP
is the subject of EPA's current rulemaking action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Pa Code, Title 26, Chapter 126, Subchapter C (relating
to motor vehicle and fuels programs, gasoline volatility
requirements), effective January 22, 2019. (Pa Bulletin, Vol. 48,
No. 14; April 7, 2018). This rule amended Sec.  126.301 (relating to
compliant fuel requirement) to make Chapter 126, Subchapter C no
longer applicable to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area upon the
effective date of approval by EPA of the removal of Chapter 126,
Subchapter C as a Federally-enforceable control measure in the
Commonwealth's SIP. EPA approved Pennsylvania's SIP request to
remove the PA DEP RVP requirements of Chapter 126 in a final rule
published December 20, 2018 (83 FR 65301).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What prompted ACHD to suspend locally adopted gasoline volatility
requirements applicable to Allegheny County?

A. Pennsylvania Legislature Directs PA DEP To Suspend State Gasoline
Volatility Controls Applicable to the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area

    In the 2013-14 session, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed,
and Governor Corbett signed into law, Act 50 (Pub. L. 674, No. 50 of
May 14, 2014), that amended the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act
to direct PA DEP to initiate a process to repeal PA DEP's Pittsburgh-
Beaver Valley Area gasoline RVP requirements. That process culminated
with PA DEP's submission on May 2, 2018 of a SIP revision requesting
that EPA remove from the Pennsylvania portion of the SIP the Pa. Code
RVP provisions of Chapter 126, Subchapter C gasoline RVP limits and
also approve PA DEP's CAA 110(l)-required noninterference demonstration
showing that repeal of PA DEP's RVP requirements would not interfere
with the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area's attainment of any NAAQS.
Pennsylvania's analysis showed that the emissions impact from repeal of
the 7.8 psi RVP summer limit (to be replaced by the Federal 9.0 psi
summertime gasoline RVP requirement) would be fully offset through
substitution of commensurate benefits from another enacted emission
reduction measure reducing emissions from area sources in the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, as well as reductions from permanent
shutdown of a glass manufacturing facility in Allegheny County. For
further information on the Commonwealth's supporting demonstration
showing removal of the RVP program from the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area will not interfere with the area's ability to meet Federal NAAQS,
as well as EPA's analysis of that demonstration, please refer to EPA's
December 20, 2018 (83 FR 65301) final rule approving Pennsylvania's
removal of PA DEP's Chapter 126 low-RVP program from the seven counties
comprising the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area and the docket for that
action.

B. ACHD Amendment of Allegheny County Gasoline Volatility Requirements
Rule To Suspend Local RVP Requirements Applicable to Allegheny County

    ACHD subsequently revised its own RVP limit rule (Article XXI,
Sec. Sec.  2105.90, and 2107.15 of the Rules and Regulations of the
Allegheny County Health Department; amended February 21, 2019,
effective March 3, 2019), suspending applicability of ACHD's gasoline
RVP requirements upon the effective date of EPA's removal of the
revised Article XXI sections from the Allegheny County portion of the
Pennsylvania SIP.
    The revised ACHD gasoline volatility regulation contains an added
provision suspending the requirements that ban the sale or transfer of
gasoline in Allegheny County non-compliant with a 7.8 psi RVP limit
(between May 1 through September 15). Per ACHD's revised rule (as
amended February 21, 2019), the County's 7.8 psi summer limit and
related requirements (at Article XXI, Sec. Sec.  2105.90 and 2107.15)
will no longer be applicable upon the effective date of EPA's final
action approving removal of the RVP program from the Allegheny County
portion of the Pennsylvania SIP. Upon the effective date of EPA final
action to approve the Commonwealth's request to remove the Allegheny
County 7.8 psi RVP program requirements from the SIP, all state and
local RVP limits for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley would be rescinded,
reverting the entire

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area to the applicable Federal Phase II RVP
requirements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See EPA's Phase II Volatility Regulations published June 11,
1990 (55 FR 23658), as amended December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704). EPA
amended Federal Phase II volatility regulations to make them
consistent with CAA section 211(h), prohibiting the sale of gasoline
(beginning in 1992) with RVP above 9.0 psi in all areas designated
attainment for ozone. For areas designated nonattainment, the
regulations retained the original Phase II standards established by
the June 1990 Phase II rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is the historic reason for adoption of gasoline volatility
control and the status of air quality in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area?

    The gasoline volatility limit was originally adopted by
Pennsylvania as part of a suite of measures to address ground level
ozone pollution in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, which has
historically been designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS. Since
passage of the CAA in 1990, portions of the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area have also been designated nonattainment for the daily and annual
averaging period fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS.
Since the low-RVP gasoline program affects primarily volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions, and to
some degree directly emitted PM2.5 emissions, our
consideration of the impact of removal of this rule on air quality
focuses primarily on those NAAQS to which emission from this program
contribute (either directly or as NAAQS precursor emissions).

A. The Status of the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area With Respect to the
Ozone NAAQS

    On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA designated and classified
the Pittsburgh counties of Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler,
Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties as nonattainment for the
1-hour ozone NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 1979. On April 9, 2001,
Pennsylvania submitted a request to redesignate the Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley Area to attainment of the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS, along with a
maintenance plan to demonstrate that the area would continue to attain
for a 10-year period--a plan which relied, in part, on emissions
reductions attributable to the 7.8 psi RVP summertime gasoline
volatility control program. Subsequently, EPA determined that the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area had attained the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS
by its extended attainment date and approved the Commonwealth's 1-hour
redesignation request and maintenance plan SIP revision on November 19,
2001 (66 FR 53094).
    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA issued a revised NAAQS for
ozone, strengthening the primary and secondary standards to 0.080 parts
per million (ppm) and changing the averaging time from 1-hour to 8-
hours. In May of 2012, EPA classified the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area
as moderate nonattainment under section 181 of the CAA.\3\ On April 4,
2013, EPA determined that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area had
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its applicable attainment date
(based on air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 period) and warranted a
clean data determination. This latter determination suspended certain
CAA planning requirements for the Area, including requirements for an
attainment demonstration, associated reasonable further progress plan,
contingency measures, reasonably available control measure (RACM)
analysis, and other CAA part D planning requirements for moderate ozone
nonattainment areas, for as long as the area continued to monitor
attainment of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In 2012, EPA finalized revisions to the 2004 Phase 1
Implementation Rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that specified
requirements to meet the 1997 ozone NAAQS. (77 FR 28424, May 14,
2012). The revisions were EPA's response to a December 22, 2006
decision in South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 472
F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006), directing EPA to classify areas under
Part D of the CAA. As a result, EPA reclassified the former subpart
1 nonattainment areas, like the Pittsburgh Beaver Valley Area, under
subpart 2. The 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS was eventually revoked on
April 6, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436), EPA strengthened the 8-hour NAAQS
from 0.080 to 0.075 ppm. On May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088), EPA designated
and classified the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as marginal
nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On March 6, 2015 (80 FR
12264), EPA published its ozone implementation rule for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, which established the date of July 20, 2016 as the deadline for
marginal areas to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On December 6,
2016 (81 FR 87819), EPA determined that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area had attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by that July 20, 2016
deadline.\4\ The Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area continues to attain the
2008 ozone NAAQS for the most recent 2016-2018 three-year monitoring
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On February 16, 2018, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an
opinion on the EPA's regulations implementing the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
known as the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule. South Coast Air
Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 16, 2018).
The D.C. Circuit Court found certain provisions from the 2008 Ozone
SIP Requirements rule unreasonable including EPA's provision for a
``redesignation substitute.'' The D.C. Circuit Court vacated these
provisions and found redesignations must comply with all required
elements in CAA section 107(d)(3) and thus found the ``redesignation
substitute'' which did not require all items in CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) violated the CAA and was thus unreasonable. The D.C.
Circuit Court also vacated other provisions relating to anti-
backsliding in the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule as the Court
found them unreasonable. Id. The D.C. Circuit Court found other
parts of the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule unrelated to anti-
backsliding and this action reasonable and denied the petition for
appeal on those. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 1, 2015 (80 FR 65291), EPA promulgated a revised ozone
NAAQS of 0.070 ppm. On November 6, 2017 (82 FR 54232), EPA issued final
2015 ozone NAAQS designations for most U.S. counties, designating all
seven Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area counties as ``attainment/
unclassifiable.''
    Pennsylvania's April 19, 2019 SIP submittal for removal of the RVP
program in Allegheny County relies upon a demonstration of
noninterference, per the requirements of CAA section 110(l), that was
originally submitted by PA DEP as part of its May 2, 2018 SIP revision
for removal of the state RVP program in the larger Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley Area--a substantially similar state RVP requirements rule that
geographically overlaps Allegheny County's rule. EPA approved
Pennsylvania's May 2, 2018 SIP noninterference demonstration as part of
our December 20, 2018 approval of that SIP revision (83 FR 65301). This
SIP-approved 110(l) demonstration includes EPA updated photochemical
grid modeling results for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (See Appendix H of
Pennsylvania's May 2, 2018 SIP revision, which is also appended for
reference as Appendix H to the March 19, 2019 SIP requesting removal of
Allegheny County's RVP program), based on updated electric generating
unit data for 2017.\5\ This forecast data predicts that the Pittsburgh-
Beaver Valley Area will continue to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS and
will remain in attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS by 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA Projected 2023 Ozone Design Values for the Pittsburgh--
Beaver Valley Area.
    Source: Notice of Availability--Preliminary Interstate Ozone
Transport Modeling Data for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. Data Spreadsheet
is available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-12/2015_o3_naaqs_preliminary_transport_assessment_design_values_contributions.xlsx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The Status of the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area With Respect to the
Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS

    On October 17, 2006, EPA published a revised 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS (71 FR 61144). On November 3, 2009, EPA

designated the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as nonattainment for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 58688) under CAA part D, subpart 1.
On June 2, 2014, EPA reclassified the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area as
moderate nonattainment under CAA part D, subpart 4 (79 FR 31566),
including all of Beaver, Butler, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties
and portions of Allegheny, Armstrong, Greene, and Lawrence Counties. On
May 2, 2014, EPA determined that the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area was
in attainment of the 2006 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
based on 2010-2012 ambient monitoring data (79 FR 25014). On October 2,
2015 (80 FR 59624), EPA approved a request from Pennsylvania to
redesignate the Pittsburgh-Beaver County Area to attainment of the 1997
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
    On January 15, 2013, EPA published revised annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS (78 FR 3086). On April 7, 2015, EPA designated
Allegheny County as moderate nonattainment of the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS (80 FR 18535).\6\ Allegheny County continues to
be nonattainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This action corrects an initial final designations action
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, which was signed by EPA on
December 18, 2014 and published January 15, 2015 (80 FR 2206). This
correction included more recently available data for use in
designating certain areas of the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the Commonwealth's submittal?

    State/local control of motor gasoline is preempted by CAA section
211(c)(4)(A), except in cases where EPA has granted a preemption waiver
under 211(c)(4)(B) or (C) as part of a SIP approval. As such a SIP-
approved, Federally preempted CAA 211(c)(4) ``boutique fuel'' program,
Allegheny County's RVP control program is not a mandatory measure
required to address nonattainment under Part D of Subchapter 1 of the
CAA. Nor are boutique fuels subject to ``anti-backsliding'' as it
relates to a revoked NAAQS (e.g., the 1979 1-hour or 1997 ozone NAAQS)
in the case where EPA adopts a more stringent NAAQS (e.g., the 2015
ozone NAAQS), since state/locally-adopted boutique fuels are not an
``applicable requirement'' that must be retained as a SIP obligation
(in certain situations) where a NAAQS has been revoked by EPA.\7\ Nor
does section CAA section 193, applicable to pre-1990 implemented or
required rules, apply because this boutique fuel rule was neither
required or enacted prior to that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For instance, in the case of the 2008 Ozone Implementation
Rule (40 CFR part 51, subpart AA), applicable requirements for
purposes of anti-backsliding are defined at 40 CFR 51.1100(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, EPA's primary consideration for determining the
approvability of Pennsylvania's request to rescind the requirements for
a gasoline volatility control program is whether this requested action
complies with section 110 of the CAA, specifically section 110(l).\8\
Section 110(l) of the CAA requires that a revision to the SIP not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA evaluates each SIP revision for
CAA 110(l) noninterference compliance on an individual basis. EPA
interprets CAA section 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in
effect, including those that have been promulgated, but for which EPA
has not yet made designations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ CAA section 193, with respect to removal of requirements in
place prior to enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments, is not relevant
because Pennsylvania's RVP control requirements in the Pittsburgh-
Beaver Valley Area were not included in the SIP prior to enactment
of the 1990 CAA amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the absence of an attainment demonstration that shows no
interference with any applicable NAAQS or requirement of the CAA under
section 110(l), EPA believes it is appropriate to allow states to
substitute equivalent emissions reductions to compensate for any
potential emission increases caused by a change to a SIP-approved
program, so long as net actual emissions to the air do not increase.
``Equivalent'' emission reductions mean reductions which are equal to
or greater than those reductions achieved by the control measure
approved in the SIP, which in this case is 7.8 psi RVP gasoline. To
show that compensating emission reductions are equivalent, modeling or
adequate justification must be provided. The compensating, equivalent
or greater reductions must represent real, new emissions reductions
achieved in a contemporaneous time frame to the change of the existing
SIP control measure, in order to preserve the status quo level of
emissions in the air. In addition to being contemporaneous, the
equivalent emissions reductions must also be permanent, enforceable,
quantifiable, and surplus to be approved into the SIP.
    In its May 2, 2018 SIP revision, PA DEP submitted a section 110(l)
demonstration that relies upon emission reductions from another
emission control measure (and a permanently shutdown stationary source)
to fully offset any potential increase in emissions that would
otherwise result from removal of the SIP approved 7.8 psi RVP
summertime gasoline requirement in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area.
Specifically, PA DEP demonstrated that emission reductions in the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area from the 7.8 psi RVP program are fully
offset by: (1) Reductions from an adopted, implemented Pennsylvania
regulation relating to the use and application of adhesives, sealants,
primers, and solvents at 25 Pa. Code Section 129.77 and (2) the
permanent shutdown of a facility in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area.
The substitute emissions reduction measures were demonstrated to be
quantifiable, permanent, surplus, enforceable, and contemporaneous
(i.e. occurring at approximately the same time as cessation of the low-
RVP fuel program). Upon removal of the state 7.8 psi summertime RVP
program, the Federal 9.0 psi RVP limit becomes the applicable fuel
volatility control program in the Area.
    EPA approved the Commonwealth's CAA 110(l) noninterference
demonstration supporting removal of the 7.8 psi RVP gasoline program in
the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area on December 20, 2018 (83 FR 65301).
The PA DEP's 7.8 psi RVP control program for the entire Pittsburgh-
Beaver Valley Area (under Pa Code Chapter 126) is similar in legal
substance to that of Allegheny County's 7.8 psi RVP program (under
Article XXI of the County's Rules and Regulations). Because of the
similarity of the two programs, the March 19, 2019 SIP revision
requesting removal of ACHD's 7.8 psi RVP program from the SIP relies
upon the Commonwealth's prior approved noninterference demonstration to
show that removal of the ACHD program will not interfere with
attainment (or other CAA applicable requirements) of any NAAQS in the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area. The March 19, 2018 SIP revision contains
a copy of the PA DEP's earlier demonstration, for reference, without
changing the substance of that prior demonstration. Because of the
similarity between the ACHD county low-RVP rule and the areawide PA DEP
low-RVP rule, EPA agrees with this approach to demonstrating that
removal of ACHD's 7.8 psi RVP program for Allegheny County will not
require additional evaluation for CAA 110(l) noninterference beyond the
showing made by PA DEP for the 7.8. psi RVP program suspension in the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area.

V. Impacts on the Boutique Fuels List

    Section 1541(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 required EPA, in
consultation with the U.S. Department of Energy, to determine the
number of fuels programs approved into all SIPs as of September 1, 2004
and to publish a list of such fuels. On December 28, 2006 (71 FR
78192), EPA published the list of boutique fuels, as it existed at that
time. EPA maintains the current list of boutique fuels on its website
at: https://www.epa.gov/gasoline-standards/state-fuels. The final list
of boutique fuels was based on a fuel type approach. CAA section
211(c)(4)(C)(v)(III) requires that EPA remove a fuel from the published
list if it is either identical to a Federal fuel or is removed from the
SIP in which it is approved. Under the adopted fuel type approach, EPA
interpreted this requirement to mean that a fuel would have to be
removed from all SIPs in which it was approved prior to being removed
from the list (71 FR 78195).
    The 7.8 psi RVP fuel program (as required by Allegheny County
Article XXI), as approved into Pennsylvania's SIP, is a fuel type that
is included in EPA's boutique fuel list, as shown in a state-by-state
listing of boutique fuels (71 FR 78198-99). The list of states and
areas where federal 7.8 psi and 9.0 psi low-RVP gasoline are currently
required can also be referenced on EPA's Gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure
web page (https://www.epa.gov/gasoline-standards/gasoline-reid-vapor-pressure). On that list, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania is currently
listed as a partial area boutique fuel program for Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. Subsequent to the final effective date of EPA's approval
of Pennsylvania's March 19, 2019 SIP revision to remove Allegheny
County's Rules and Regulations, Article XXI RVP requirement from the
SIP, EPA will update the State Fuels and Gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure
web pages with the effective date of the SIP removal. After the
effective date of the final action on the March 19, 2019 SIP revision,
EPA will remove the 7.8 psi RVP fuel type for Pennsylvania from the
list of boutique fuels.

VI. What Action is EPA taking?

    EPA has reviewed Pennsylvania's March 19, 2019 SIP revision
requesting removal of the Allegheny County low-RVP rule and related
requirements from the Pennsylvania SIP. EPA is proposing to approve
Pennsylvania's March 19, 2019 SIP revision request to remove gasoline
RVP-related provisions of Article XXI of the ACHD's Rules and
Regulations from the Allegheny County portion of the Commonwealth's
SIP--including Part E, Subpart 9, section 2105.90 (related to gasoline
volatility) and Part G, section 2107.15 (related to test methods for
gasoline RVP).
    EPA is proposing to remove Allegheny County's 7.8 psi RVP
requirements from the approved SIP, as codified at 40 CFR
52.2020(c)(2). This proposed removal from the approved Pennsylvania SIP
is supported by a CAA noninterference demonstration prepared by PA DEP
in support of the May 2018 SIP revision that requested removal of the
Commonwealth's 7.8 psi RVP program in the larger Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley Area--the removal of which EPA approved in the final rule
published December 20, 2018 (83 FR 65301). In the March 19, 2019 SIP
revision submitted by PA DEP on behalf of ACHD, ACHD references this
demonstration, which analyzes the suspension of 7.8 psi gasoline for
the entire Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area, including Allegheny County.
With this action, EPA is also proposing to approve the Commonwealth's
use of the previously approved CAA 110(l) demonstration from its May 2,
2018 submission to demonstrate that removal of the Allegheny County
low-RVP gasoline program does not interfere with the Commonwealth's
ability to attain or maintain any NAAQS in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Area. Our approval of the May 2, 2018 SIP submittal is in accordance
with requirements for SIP actions under CAA section 110.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. Since EPA already approved the Commonwealth's technical
demonstration considering the emissions impact of the removal of 7.8
psi RVP programs from the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area (as part of its
December 2018 approval of Pennsylvania's request to remove the PA DEP
RVP requirements in the same area), EPA is not soliciting public
comment on the technical merits of that approved demonstration. Any
comments received will be considered by the Agency before EPA takes
final action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule to approve Pennsylvania's request
to remove ACHD's gasoline volatility regulatory requirements from the
Pennsylvania SIP does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic
compounds.

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

    Dated: April 12, 2019.
Cosmo Servidio.
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2019-08156 Filed 4-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 47)]
[Notices]
[Page 11007-11008]
[DOCID:fr12mr07-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-515-000]

Domtar Corporation; Notice of Issuance of Order

March 5, 2007.
    Domtar Corporation (Domtar) filed an application for market-based
rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed
market-based

rate schedule provides for the sale of energy and capacity and at
market-based rates. Domtar also requested waivers of various Commission
regulations. In particular, Domtar requested that the Commission grant
blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability by Domtar.
    On March 1, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director,
Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the requests
for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated
that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the Federal
Register establishing a period of time for the filing of protests.
Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket
approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by
Domtar should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004).
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is April 2, 2007.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
Domtar is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of
Domtar, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of Domtar's issuance of securities or assumptions
of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order 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
filed to access the document. 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 the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4340 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                              Table Revisions to

                            Request to Redesignate
                               Kentucky Counties
                              Located Within the

                           Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN MSA
                        8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area

                                 Prepared by:
                    Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet
                           Division for Air Quality

                                 December 2016

                                 THIS PAGE HAS

                                 INTENTIONALLY

                                BEEN LEFT BLANK

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) recently reviewed Kentucky's submittal of the request to redesignate the Kentucky counties located within the Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Metropolitan Statistical Area's 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.  As part of Kentucky's response to U.S. EPA comments, the following tables have been updated with revised data.

                                   Table 13
         Cincinnati OH-KY-IN Area 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                            Projected VOC Emissions
                                     (TSD)

                                      VOC
                                    County
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2020
                                     2030
                                     Boone
                                     9.60
                                     8.54
                                     7.00
                                     5.84
                                   Campbell
                                     3.96
                                     3.40
                                     2.55
                                     2.10
                                    Kenton
                                     6.76
                                     5.88
                                     4.57
                                     3.95
                                    Butler
                                     25.85
                                     22.70
                                     19.41
                                     17.63
                                   Clermont
                                     14.13
                                     12.39
                                     10.17
                                     9.07
                                    Clinton
                                     5.61
                                     4.77
                                     3.99
                                     3.75
                                   Hamilton
                                     60.07
                                     51.85
                                     42.48
                                     37.42
                                    Warren
                                     16.67
                                     14.21
                                     11.59
                                     9.93
                                   Dearborn
                                     7.31
                                     8.29
                                     6.52
                                     6.42
                                     TOTAL
                                    149.96
                                    132.03
                                    108.28
                                     96.11

                                   Table 16
         Kenton County, Kentucky 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                            Projected NOx Emissions
                                     (TSD)

                                      NOx
                                    Kenton
                                    Sector
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2017
                                     2020
                                     2025
                                     2030
                                      EGU
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                    Non-EGU
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                      Air
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                   Non-road
                                     0.77
                                     0.64
                                     0.51
                                     0.43
                                     0.35
                                     0.27
                                     Area
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                    On-road
                                     6.53
                                     5.17
                                     3.73
                                     2.28
                                     1.64
                                     0.99
                                     TOTAL
                                     8.33
                                     6.84
                                     5.27
                                     3.74
                                     3.02
                                     2.29
                                   Table 23
         Cincinnati OH-KY-IN Area 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                            Projected NOx Emissions
                                     (TSD)

                                      NOx
                                    County
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2020
                                     2030
                                     Boone
                                     17.61
                                     16.21
                                     13.59
                                     10.67
                                   Campbell
                                     5.34
                                     4.39
                                     2.39
                                     1.46
                                    Kenton
                                     8.33
                                     6.84
                                     3.74
                                     2.29
                                    Butler
                                     31.98
                                     29.74
                                     21.34
                                     18.22
                                   Clermont
                                     54.48
                                     49.59
                                     36.48
                                     34.60
                                    Clinton
                                     6.20
                                     4.99
                                     3.02
                                     2.10
                                   Hamilton
                                     78.65
                                     62.88
                                     45.94
                                     38.15
                                    Warren
                                     16.29
                                     12.29
                                     8.51
                                     5.95
                                   Dearborn
                                     19.82
                                     13.39
                                     4.14
                                     3.83
                                     TOTAL
                                    238.70
                                    200.32
                                    139.15
                                    117.27

                                   Table 35
              Kenton County 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                         NOx Emissions and Projections
                                     (TSD)

                                      NOx
                                    Kenton
                                     2020
                                     2030
                                    Sector
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2017
                                     2020
                                     2025
                                     2030
                                    Budget
                               and Safety Margin
                                  Budget and
                                 Safety Margin
                                      EGU
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00

                                    Non-EGU
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01
                                     0.01

                                      Air
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00
                                     0.00

                                   Non-road
                                     0.77
                                     0.64
                                     0.51
                                     0.43
                                     0.35
                                     0.27

                                     Area
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02
                                     1.02

                                    On-road
                                     6.53
                                     5.17
                                     3.73
                                     2.28
                                     1.64
                                     0.99

                                     TOTAL
                                     8.33
                                     6.84
                                     5.27
                                     3.74
                                     3.02
                                     2.29
                                     2.75
                                     1.67

                                   Table 43
                           Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN MSA
                     2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                         TOTAL Projected VOC Emissions
                                     (TSD)

                                    Budget
                               and Safety Margin
                                  Budget and
                                 Safety Margin
                                      VOC
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2017
                                     2020
                                     2025
                                     2030
                                     2020
                                     2030
                                   Boone, KY
                                     9.60
                                     8.54
                                     7.71
                                     7.00
                                     6.42
                                     5.84
                                     1.61
                                     1.18
                                 Campbell, KY
                                     3.96
                                     3.40
                                     2.95
                                     2.55
                                     2.34
                                     2.10
                                     0.99
                                     0.68
                                  Kenton, KY
                                     6.76
                                     5.88
                                     5.18
                                     4.57
                                     4.26
                                     3.95
                                     1.50
                                     1.02
                                  Butler, OH
                                     25.85
                                     22.70

                                     19.41

                                     17.63

                                 Clermont, OH
                                     14.13
                                     12.39

                                     10.17

                                     9.07

                                  Clinton, OH
                                     5.61
                                     4.77

                                     3.99

                                     3.75

                                 Hamilton, OH
                                     60.07
                                     51.85

                                     42.48

                                     37.42

                                  Warren, OH
                                     16.67
                                     14.21

                                     11.59

                                     9.93

                                 Dearborn, IN
                                     7.31
                                     8.29

                                     6.52

                                     6.42

                                Combined Total
                                    149.96
                                    132.03

                                    108.28

                                     96.11

                                   Table 44
                           Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN MSA
                     2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                         TOTAL Projected NOx Emissions
                                     (TSD)

                                    Budget
                               and Safety Margin
                                  Budget and
                                 Safety Margin
                                      NOx
                                     2011
                                     2014
                                     2017
                                     2020
                                     2025
                                     2030
                                     2020
                                     2030
                                   Boone, KY
                                     17.61
                                     16.21
                                     14.86
                                     13.59
                                     12.08
                                     10.67
                                     2.80
                                     1.88
                                 Campbell, KY
                                     5.34
                                     4.39
                                     3.38
                                     2.39
                                     1.93
                                     1.46
                                     1.80
                                     1.09
                                  Kenton, KY
                                     8.32
                                     6.83
                                     5.26
                                     3.73
                                     3.01
                                     2.28
                                     2.75
                                     1.67
                                  Butler, OH
                                     31.98
                                     29.74

                                     21.34

                                     18.22

                                 Clermont, OH
                                     54.48
                                     49.59

                                     36.48

                                     34.60

                                  Clinton, OH
                                     6.20
                                     4.99

                                     3.02

                                     2.10

                                 Hamilton, OH
                                     78.65
                                     62.88

                                     45.94

                                     38.15

                                  Warren, OH
                                     16.29
                                     12.29

                                     8.51

                                     5.95

                                 Dearborn, IN
                                     19.82
                                     13.39

                                     4.14

                                     3.83

                                Combined Total
                                    238.69
                                    200.31

                                    139.14

                                    117.26

                                   Table 45
                           Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN MSA
                     2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area
                              Emission Reductions
                                     (TSD)

                                     2014
                                     2030
                               Total Reductions
                                      VOC
                                    132.03
                                     96.11
                                     35.92
                                      NOx
                                    200.31
                                    117.26
                                     83.05


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44996-44998]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15354]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-8129; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-197-AD;
Amendment 39-18573; AD 2016-13-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. This AD
was prompted by a determination that certain maintenance tasks for the
horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA) are inadequate. This AD
requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable,
to incorporate new airworthiness limitations for the HSTA. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct premature wear and cracking of
the HSTA, which could result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss
of control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective August 16, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 16,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center, toll-
free telephone 1-866-538-1247, or direct dial telephone 1-514-855-2999;
fax 1-514-855-7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for

and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8129.

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-2015-
8129; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.
Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on January 4, 2016 (81 FR 32) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM
was prompted by a determination that certain maintenance tasks for the
HSTA are inadequate. The NPRM proposed to require revising the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new
airworthiness limitations for the HSTA. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct premature wear and cracking of the HSTA, which could
result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss of control of the
airplane.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2014-30, dated September 5, 2014 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-
2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A revision has been made to the CL 604/605 Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks (TLMC) manual, to introduce new tasks for the
HSTA. Failure to comply with the TLMC tasks could lead to an unsafe
condition.
    This [Canadian] AD is issued to ensure that premature wear and
cracking of the affected components are detected and corrected.

    The unsafe condition is premature wear and cracking of the HSTA,
which could result in failure of the HSTA and consequent loss of
control of the airplane.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
8129.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to that comment.

Request To Change the Manufacturer's Contact Information

    Bombardier Inc., asked that we change the contact information to
include the telephone numbers and email address for the Widebody
Customer Response Center. Bombardier Inc. provided the updated
information.
    We agree with the commenter. We have changed the contact
information in this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the change described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier Inc. has issued the following service information, which
describes procedures for revising the maintenance or inspection program
to incorporate new airworthiness limitations for the HSTA.
     Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements,
of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Bombardier Challenger 604
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual, Revision 22, dated July 11,
2014.
     Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements,
of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Bombardier Challenger 605
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual, Revision 10, dated July 11,
2014.
    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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 78 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $6,630, or $85 per product.

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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 above, I certify that this AD:
    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; 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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):

2016-13-09 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18573. Docket No. FAA-
2015-8129; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-197-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective August 16, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604
Variant) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers (S/
Ns) 5301 through 5665 inclusive, and 5701 through 5962 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
Controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that certain maintenance
tasks for the horizontal stabilizer trim actuator (HSTA) are
inadequate. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct premature
wear and cracking of the HSTA, which could result in failure of the
HSTA and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
Task 27-42-01-109, Restoration (Overhaul) of the Horizontal
Stabilizer Trim Actuator, Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part
No. 8454-3 and Subs); and Task 27-42-01-111, Detailed Inspection of
the Horizontal Trim Actuator (HSTA) Secondary Load Path Indicator,
Part No. 604-92305-7 and Subs (Vendor Part No. 8454-3 and Subs); of
the applicable document identified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of
this AD.
    (1) For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial
numbers 5301 through 5665 inclusive: Section 5-10-40, Certification
Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of
the Bombardier Challenger 604 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual,
Revision 22, dated July 11, 2014.
    (2) For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes, serial
numbers 5701 through 5962 inclusive: Section 5-10-40, Certification
Maintenance Requirements, of Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of
the Bombardier Challenger 605 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual,
Revision 10, dated July 11, 2014.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised, as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or
intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing
Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2014-30, dated September 5,
2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-8129.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of
Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Bombardier Challenger 604
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual, Revision 22, dated July 11,
2014.
    (ii) Section 5-10-40, Certification Maintenance Requirements, of
Part 2, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Bombardier Challenger 605
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual, Revision 10, dated July 11,
2014.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center,
toll-free telephone 1-866-538-1247, or direct dial telephone 1-514-
855-2999; fax 1-514-855-7401; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 21, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15354 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15531-15532]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06184]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2017-0010; OMB No. 1660-0047]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Request for Federal Assistance Form--How To Process
Mission Assignments in Federal Disaster Operations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning the collection of information
necessary to allow FEMA to support the needs of States during disaster
situations through the use of other Federal agency resources.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 30, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
FEMA-2017-0010. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-
3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Patricia Pritchett, Program
Specialist, Response Directorate, Operations Division, National
Response Coordination Center, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
(202) 646-3411

for additional information. You may contact the Records Management
Division for copies of the proposed collection of information at email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Section 653 of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq., FEMA is authorized to provide assistance to States based
on needs before, during, and after a disaster has impacted the State.
For a major disaster, the Stafford Act authorizes FEMA to direct any
agency to utilize its existing authorities and resources in support of
State and local assistance response and recovery efforts. See 42 U.S.C.
5170(a)(1). For an emergency, the Stafford Act authorizes FEMA to
direct any agency to utilize its existing authorities and resources in
support of State and local emergency assistance efforts. See 42 U.S.C.
5192(a)(1). FEMA may task other Federal agencies to assist during
disasters and to support emergency efforts by State and local
governments by issuing a mission assignment to the appropriate agency.
See 44 CFR 206.5, 206.208. FEMA collects the information necessary to
determine what resources are needed and if a mission assignment is
appropriate. The information collected explains which State(s) require
assistance, what needs to be accomplished, details any resource
shortfalls, and explains what assistance is required to meet these
needs.

Collection of Information

    Title: Request for Federal Assistance Form--How to Process Mission
Assignments in Federal Disaster Operations.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0047.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 010-0-7, Resource Request Form; FEMA Form
010-0-8, Mission Assignment.
    Abstract: If a State determines that its capacity to respond to a
disaster exceeds its available resources, it may submit to FEMA a
request that the work be accomplished by a Federal agency. This request
documents how the response requirements exceed the capacity for the
State to respond to the situation on its own and what type of
assistance is required. FEMA reviews this information and may issue a
mission assignment to the appropriate Federal agency to assist the
State in its response to the situation.
    Affected Public: State, local or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 10.
    Number of Responses: 12,820.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,426 hours.
    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $301,056.52. There are no annual costs to respondents
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There is no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$28,309.28.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: March 22, 2017.
Tammi Hines
Acting, Records Management Program Chief, Mission Support, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2017-06184 Filed 3-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-24-P


[Federal Register: December 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 70831-70832]
[DOCID:fr13de07-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-405-000]

Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Filing

December 6, 2007.
    Take notice that on December 4, 2007, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC
(Texas Gas), 3800 Frederica Street, Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, pursuant
to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the
Commission's Rules and Regulations, filed a supplement to amend its
application originally filed June 25, 2007. Texas Gas requests
authority to increase the proposed storage capacity from 2 Bcf to 5.31
Bcf, in the event that the Commission does not authorize Texas Gas to
charge market based rates for the new capacity of 8.25 Bcf as proposed
in the original

application. The application is on file with the Commission and open
for public inspection. This filing is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may 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, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Since filing its original application, Texas Gas has entered into a
second Precedent Agreement for additional 3.05 Bcf of firm storage
service for a 10-year term at a fixed negotiated rate. Texas Gas
requests authority to construct the additional facilities required to
create the approximately 5.31 Bcf of new storage capacity as followed:

--Construct approximately 11 miles of 30-inch mainline pipeline loop
from the Midland 3 Compressor Station to a point near Hanson, Kentucky;
--Construct a 2,900 foot extension of the E-9 storage lateral at
Midland;
--Drill seven horizontal injection/withdrawal wells and related
facilities at Midland;
--Install one 5,488 HP gas turbine and related facilities at the
Midland 3 Compressor Station;
--Abandon in-place two existing 2,000 HP compressor units, including
appurtenant facilities, at the Midland 3 Compressor Station.
    Texas Gas proposes the service date of November 1, 2008 for the
5.31 Bcf-expansion.
    Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to Kathy
D. Fort, Manager of Certificates and Tariffs, Texas Gas Transmission,
LLC, 3800 Frederica Street, Owensboro, Kentucky, 42301.
    Any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to
the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below listed
comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the
NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on
the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will
receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for
court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments 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 the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: December 20, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-24091 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P