[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76748-76750]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30150]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 10

[Docket No. FDA 2013-S-0610]

Citizen Petition Submission; Technical Amendment

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is modernizing its
administrative regulations regarding submission of citizen petitions to
explicitly provide for electronic submission. The current regulation
does not recognize electronic methods for submitting citizen petitions;
thus, this action will enable efficiency and ease in the filing of
citizen petitions.

DATES: This final rule is effective December 19, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Helmanis, Office of Policy,
Regulations Policy Management Staff, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is updating its administrative
regulations in 21 CFR part 10 to include an electronic method for
citizen petition submissions and to remove references only to written
documents. The Agency still allows for non-electronic submissions,
however, electronic submissions of a citizen petition to a specific
electronic docket presents a simpler and straightforward approach. FDA
has created a single docket on http://www.regulations.gov, the U.S.
Government's consolidated docket Web site for Federal Agencies, for the
initial electronic submission of all citizen petitions. The FDA
Electronic Method for Submission of Citizen Petitions Docket, Docket
No. FDA 2013-S-0610, allows the petitioner to create an electronic
submission through http://www.regulations.gov and provides an
alternative to the current system of submission for citizen petitions.
Electronic submissions through http://www.regulations.gov will provide
the submitter with an immediate record of the time of submission. FDA's
Division of Dockets Management (DDM) (http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Dockets/default.htm) will continue to inform the
submitter of formal filing; however, tracking will be more easily
accomplished through electronic submission.
    DDM will receive the electronically submitted citizen petition
through the Federal Dockets Management System, the Agency component of
http://www.regulations.gov. Subsequently, DDM will review the
electronic submission and when it accepts the citizen petition for
filing, DDM will assign a docket number to that petition, different
from the FDA electronic submission docket number. This unique docket
number from DDM identifies the docket for that particular citizen
petition for all future filings and submissions related only to that
citizen petition. Subsequent submissions associated with that citizen
petition will refer to the assigned unique docket number. The advantage
to this change is that it ensures efficiency and ease in communication,
quicker interaction between citizen petitioners and FDA,

and easier access to FDA to seek input through the citizen petition
process.
    Publication of this document constitutes final action under the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). FDA has determined that
good cause exists to dispense with prior notice and public comment
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) since such notice and comment are
unnecessary because this amendment to the regulation provides only
technical and grammatical corrections, modernizes the administrative
process to add a simple and electronic method, ensures clarity in the
Agency's regulations, and updates obsolete information.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 10

    Administrative practice and procedure, News media.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
10 is amended as follows:

PART 10--ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 10 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551-558, 701-706; 15 U.S.C. 1451-1461; 21
U.S.C. 141-149, 321-397, 467f, 679, 821, 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 42
U.S.C. 201, 262, 236b, 264.

0
2. Amend Sec.  10.30 by revising paragraphs (b), (c), (d), (e)(3), and
(g) to read as follows:

Sec.  10.30  Citizen petition.

* * * * *
    (b) A petition (including any attachments) must be submitted in
accordance with the following paragraphs, as applicable:
    (1) Electronic submission. Petitions (including any attachments)
may be electronically submitted in accordance with paragraph (b)(3) of
this section and Sec.  10.20 through http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA 2013-S-0610. It is only necessary to submit one copy.
    (2) Mail, delivery services, or other non-electronic submissions. A
petition (including any attachments), that is not electronically
submitted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, must be submitted in
accordance with paragraph (b)(3) and Sec.  10.20 and delivered to this
address: Division of Dockets Management, Department of Health and Human
Services, Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852.
    It is only necessary to submit two copies.
    (3) Petition format. A petition submitted under paragraphs (b)(1)
or (b)(2) of this section must be in accordance with Sec.  10.20 and in
the following format:

Citizen Petition

Date:------------------------------------------------------------------

    The undersigned submits this petition under ---- (relevant
statutory sections, if known) of the ---- (Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act or the Public Health Service Act or any other statutory
provision for which authority has been delegated to the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs) to request the Commissioner of Food and Drugs to ----
(issue, amend, or revoke a regulation or order or take or refrain from
taking any other form of administrative action).

A. Action Requested

    ((1) If the petition requests the Commissioner to issue, amend, or
revoke a regulation, the exact wording of the existing regulation (if
any) and the proposed regulation or amendment requested.)
    ((2) If the petition requests the Commissioner to issue, amend, or
revoke an order, a copy of the exact wording of the citation to the
existing order (if any) and the exact wording requested for the
proposed order.)
    ((3) If the petition requests the Commissioner to take or refrain
from taking any other form of administrative action, the specific
action or relief requested.)

B. Statement of Grounds

    (A full statement, in a well-organized format, of the factual and
legal grounds on which the petitioner relies, including all relevant
information and views on which the petitioner relies, as well as
representative information known to the petitioner which is unfavorable
to the petitioner's position.)

C. Environmental Impact

    (A) Claim for categorical exclusion under Sec. Sec.  25.30, 25.31,
25.32, 25.33, or Sec.  25.34 of this chapter or an environmental
assessment under Sec.  25.40 of this chapter.)

D. Economic Impact

    (The following information is to be submitted only when requested
by the Commissioner following review of the petition: A statement of
the effect of requested action on: (1) Cost (and price) increases to
industry, government, and consumers; (2) productivity of wage earners,
businesses, or government; (3) competition; (4) supplies of important
materials, products, or services; (5) employment; and (6) energy supply
or demand.)

E. Certification

    The undersigned certifies, that, to the best knowledge and belief
of the undersigned, this petition includes all information and views on
which the petition relies, and that it includes representative data and
information known to the petitioner which are unfavorable to the
petition.

(Signature)------------------------------------------------------------

(Name of petitioner)---------------------------------------------------

(Mailing address)------------------------------------------------------

(Telephone number)-----------------------------------------------------
    (c) A petition which appears to meet the requirements of paragraph
(b)(3) of this section and Sec.  10.20 will be filed by the Division of
Dockets Management with the date of filing and assigned a unique docket
number. The unique docket number identifies the docket file established
by the Division of Dockets Management for all submissions relating to
the petition, as provided in this part. Subsequent submissions relating
to the matter must refer to the assigned docket number assigned in this
paragraph and will be filed in the established docket file. Related
petitions may be filed together and given the same docket number. The
Division of Dockets Management will promptly notify the petitioner of
the filing and unique docket number of the petition.
    (d) An interested person may submit comments to the Division of
Dockets Management on a filed petition, which comments become part of
the docket file. The comments are to specify the docket number of the
petition and may support or oppose the petition in whole or in part. A
request for alternative or different administrative action must be
submitted as a separate petition.
    (e) * * *
    (3) The Commissioner may grant or deny such a petition, in whole or
in part, and may grant such other relief or take other action as the
petition warrants. The petitioner is to be notified of the
Commissioner's decision. The decision will be placed in the public
docket file and may also be in the form of a notice published in the
Federal Register.
* * * * *
    (g) A petitioner may supplement, amend, or withdraw a petition
without Agency approval and without prejudice to resubmission at any
time until the Commissioner rules on the petition, unless the petition
has been referred for a hearing under parts 12, 13, 14, or 15 of this
chapter. After a ruling or referral, a petition may be supplemented,
amended, or withdrawn only with the

approval of the Commissioner. The Commissioner may approve withdrawal,
with or without prejudice against resubmission of the petition.
* * * * *

    Dated: December 13, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-30150 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 74 (Monday, April 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21722-21723]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9303]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2759-001, ER11-27-001, ER11-3320-001, ER10-
2744-001, ER10-2740-001, ER11-3321-001.
    Applicants: Bridgeport Energy, LLC, Riverside Generating Company,
L.L.C., Rocky Road Power, LLC, LSP Safe Harbor Holdings, LLC, LSP
University Park, LLC, WALLINGFORD ENERGY LLC.
    Description: NOTIFICATION OF CHANGE IN STATUS of Bridgeport Energy,
LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 04/06/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110406-5151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 27, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3317-000.
    Applicants: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company.
    Description: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company submits tariff
filing per 35: Section 23.1 to be effective 4/7/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5019.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3318-000.
    Applicants: Woodway Energy Partners, LLC.
    Description: Woodway Energy Partners, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.12: Petition for Acceptance of Initial Tariff, Waivers, and Blanket
Authority to be effective 6/7/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5041.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3319-000.
    Applicants: Troy Energy, LLC.
    Description: Troy Energy, LLC's Notice of Cancellation of Reactive
Power Rate Schedule.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5088.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3320-000.
    Applicants: PPL University Park, LLC.
    Description: PPL University Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): LSP University Park, LLC MBR Notice of Succession to
be effective 3/9/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3321-000.
    Applicants: PPL Wallingford Energy LLC.
    Description: PPL Wallingford Energy LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): LSP Wallingford, LLC MBR Notice of Succession to be
effective 3/9/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3322-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): Revisions to the Tariff and OA re Emerg. Load
Response Program ``Reporting'' to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5126.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3323-000.
    Applicants: PPL University Park, LLC.
    Description: PPL University Park, LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii): LSP University Park, LLC Reactive Rate Schedule
Notice of Succession to be effective 3/9/2011.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3324-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Service Agreement of Otter
Tail Power Company.
    Filed Date: 04/08/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110408-5106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 29, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER97-324-023, ER97-3834-030, ER00-1816-011, ER05-
1469-008, ER07-415-008, ER01-2317-013, ER08-1418-006, ER10-663-005,
ER09-1061-005.
    Applicants: DTE Energy Trading, Inc., The Detroit Edison Company,
DTE Stoneman, LLC, DTE Pontiac North, LLC, DTE East China, LLC, Metro
Energy, L.L.C., DTE Energy Supply, Inc., Woodland Biomass Power Ltd.,
DTE River Rouge No. 1, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of The Detroit Edison
Company et al.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110407-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 28, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 8, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-9303 Filed 4-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24567-24569]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09999]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0285]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Elizabeth River, Elizabeth, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation
regulation for the First Street Bridge across the Elizabeth River at
mile 0.4, at Elizabeth, New Jersey. The drawbridge was converted to a
fixed bridge in July 2010, and the operating regulation is no longer
necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective May 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this final rule, [USCG-2014-0285] is
available at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the
``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the
line associated with this final rule. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Joe Arca, Project Officer, First Coast Guard District
Bridge Program, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the First Street Bridge, that once
required draw operations in 33 CFR 117.718(b), was removed and
converted to a fixed bridge in July 2010. Therefore, the regulation is
no longer applicable and shall be removed from publication. It is
unnecessary to publish an NPRM because this regulatory action does not
purport to place any restrictions on mariners but rather removes a
restriction that has no further use or value.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. The bridge has been a fixed bridge
for four years and this rule merely requires an administrative change
to the Federal Register, in order to omit a regulatory requirement that
is no longer applicable or necessary. The modification has already
taken place and the removal of the regulation will not affect mariners
currently operating on this waterway. Therefore, a delayed effective
date is unnecessary.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The First Street Bridge across the Elizabeth River at mile 0.4, was
converted to a fixed bridge in July 2010. It has come to the attention
of the Coast Guard that the governing regulation for this drawbridge
was never removed subsequent to the conversion to a fixed bridge. The
elimination of this drawbridge necessitates the removal of the
drawbridge operation regulation, 33 CFR 117.718(b), pertaining to the
former drawbridge.
    The purpose of this rule is to remove the paragraph of 33 CFR
117.718(b) that refers to the First Street Bridge at mile 0.4, from the
Code of Federal Regulations since it governs a bridge that is no longer
able to be opened.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117.718(b) by
removing restrictions and the regulatory burden related to the draw
operations for this bridge that is no longer a drawbridge. The change
removes the paragraph of the regulation governing the First Street
Bridge since the bridge has been converted to a fixed bridge. This
Final Rule seeks to update the Code of Federal Regulations by removing
language that governs the operation of the First Street Bridge, which
in fact is no longer is a drawbridge. This change does not affect
waterway or land traffic. This change does not affect nor does it alter
the operating schedules in 33 CFR 117.718 that govern the remaining
active drawbridges on the Elizabeth River.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget
has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The Coast Guard does not consider this rule to be ``significant''
under that Order because it is an administrative change and does not
affect the way vessels operate on the waterway.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule will have no effect on small entities since this
drawbridge has been converted to a fixed bridge and the regulation
governing draw operations for this bridge is no longer applicable.
There is no new restriction or regulation being imposed by this rule;
therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

3. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

4. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

5. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the

aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

7. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

8. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

9. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

10. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

11. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

12. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

13. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the drawbridge operation for the First
Street Bridge which has been converted to a fixed bridge. This rule is
categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32) (e), of the
Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32) (e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  117.718  [Amended]

0
2. Remove Sec.  117.718(b) and redesignate Sec.  117.718(c) as Sec.
117.718(b) respectively.

    Dated: April 17, 2014.
V.B. Gifford, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, First Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-09999 Filed 4-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 222)]
[Notices]
[Page 70728-70729]
[DOCID:fr18no10-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-16-000]

Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC; Notice of Application

November 10, 2010.
    Take notice that on October 28, 2010, Florida Gas Transmission
Company, LLC (FGT), 5444 Westheimer Road, Houston, Texas 77056, filed
in Docket No. CP11-16-000, an application, pursuant to section 7(c) of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA), as amended, and Parts 157 of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Regulations, to construct,
own, operate and maintain natural gas transmission facilities (Miami
Mainline Loop Project). Specifically, FGT proposes to construct, own
and operate approximately 3 miles of 24-inch pipeline loop and install
a pig receiver at Compressor Station No. 22, all of which are located
in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The total estimated cost for the
proposed Miami Mainline Loop Project is $35.4 million, all as more
fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission
and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web
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, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Stephen Veatch, Senior Director of Certificates & Tariffs, Florida Gas
Transmission Company, LLC, 5444 Westheimer Road, Houston, Texas, 77056,
or call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public

record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental
Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the
anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final
environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The
filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding
or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will
serve to notify Federal and State agencies of the timing for the
completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to
complete all Federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of
issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, 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 7 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.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: December 1, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-29057 Filed 11-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 89 (Thursday, May 7, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27170-27172]
[FR Doc No: 2020-09640]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0448; Product Identifier 2020-NM-050-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes. This proposed AD
was prompted by a report of hydraulic fluid on the ground near the main
landing gear (MLG) brake assembly. The hydraulic leakage started in a
cracked hydraulic pipe, with the crack likely due to chafing between
two hydraulic pipes or between hydraulic pipes and structure. This
proposed AD would require an inspection for chafing or interference of
certain hydraulic pipes and certain rib passage holes, and, depending
on findings, modification or repair, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which will be incorporated by
reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 22,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195. It is also available in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2020-0448.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0448; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0448;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-050-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based
on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments we receive, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact the FAA receives about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0072, dated March 26, 2020
(``EASA AD 2020-0072'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10 airplanes.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report of hydraulic fluid on the
ground near the MLG brake assembly. The hydraulic leakage started in a
cracked System #2 hydraulic pipe, with the crack likely due to chafing
between two hydraulic pipes or between hydraulic pipes and structure.
The FAA is proposing this AD to address chafed or cracked hydraulic
pipes, which could lead to hydraulic fluid leakage near an ignition
source and possibly result in an uncontained fire. See the MCAI for
additional background information.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0072 describes procedures for an inspection for
chafing or interference of the System #2 hydraulic pipes and rib 1 to
rib 2a passage holes, and, depending on findings, modification to
prevent interference or chafing at rib passage holes or repair. This
material 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.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, the FAA
has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2020-0072 described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2020-0072
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2020-0072 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2020-0072 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2020-
0072 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0448 after the FAA
final rule is published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 85 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                  Labor cost                               Parts cost                 product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170............  None............................            $170         $14,450
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
            Labor cost                   Parts cost           product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 24 work-hours x $85 per hour  Up to $5,500........          $7,540
 = $2,040.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA has determined that this proposed AD would not have
federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) 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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2020-0448; Product Identifier
2020-NM-050-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by June 22, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 10
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of hydraulic fluid on the
ground near the main landing gear brake assembly. The hydraulic
leakage started in a cracked System #2 hydraulic pipe, with the
crack likely due to chafing between two hydraulic pipes or between
hydraulic pipes and structure. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
chafed or cracked hydraulic pipes, which could lead to hydraulic
fluid leakage near an ignition source and possibly result in an
uncontained fire.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0072, dated March 26, 2020 (``EASA AD 2020-0072'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0072

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0072 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0072 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, 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 Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Dassault
Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by
the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2020-0072, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
89990 6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu.
You may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0448.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on April 30, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-09640 Filed 5-6-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION 1

5 Post Office Square, Suite 100

Boston, MA  02109-3912

Memorandum

	Date:     	January 24, 2011

	Subject: 	Technical Support Document for Revision to the Carbon
Monoxide Maintenance Plan for Lowell, Massachusetts

	From: 		Anne K. McWilliams, Environmental Scientist

			Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection

 	 To: 		Anne Arnold, Manager

			Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection

On April 14, 2010, the State of Massachusetts submitted a formal
revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP).  The SIP revision
consists of a modification to Massachusetts’s carbon monoxide (CO)
maintenance plan for Lowell.

Background

The City of Lowell, Massachusetts was designated nonattainment for the
CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in 1978 (43 FR 9003).
In 1991, following passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, the
city retained this designation by operation of law (56 FR 56694),
although ambient monitoring showed attainment at that time. On May 25,
2001, the State of Massachusetts submitted a formal CO redesignation
request for Lowell (and Springfield, Waltham, and Worcester).  On
February 19, 2002, the U.S. EPA redesignated the City of Lowell
nonattainment area to attainment for the CO standard and approved the
Massachusetts maintenance plan for this area (and for Springfield,
Waltham, and Worcester) (67 FR 7272).  Since that time, there have been
no violations of the CO NAAQS of 9 ppm (8 hour average) or 35 ppm (1
hour average) in Lowell, and CO is trending downward to a level less
than 30% the NAAQS.

Evaluation of Massachusetts’s Submittal

Massachusetts would like to discontinue monitoring for CO in Lowell.
Lowell is a “sole pollutant” site, monitoring only CO.  The
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) allocates
considerable resources each year to cover the lease agreement with the
property owner, maintenance of the monitoring and support equipment,
phone and electricity, travel to and from the site from the main office
in Lawrence, and staff time to conduct routine and emergency
maintenance, all of which are resources that could better be used
elsewhere in the state’s monitoring program.

As previously stated, CO levels have been falling in Lowell since the
early 1980s.  (See attached Figure 1 of Lowell CO levels.)  The NAAQS of
9 ppm (8 hour average) has not been violated since 1984, and current
readings of the 8 hr 2nd high design value are in the 2 to 3 ppm range,
and have been for the past nine (9) years. During this period, the daily
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Lowell area continued to increase.
(See attached Table 1 for the Northern Middlesex County  Daily VMT
trend.)  Most of the CO reduction has been due to “fleet turnover,”
with newer, cleaner motor vehicles making up an increasing share of the
fleet, and this trend is unlikely to change.

On October 17, 2006, EPA published a final monitoring rule revising
minimum monitoring requirements.  That rule explicitly recognized that,
in some cases where measured levels of pollutants are low, shutting down
certain CO monitors may be allowed.  The rule, however, also explicitly
provides that if a monitor is the only monitor in the area, and it
serves as a trigger to implement a contingency measure in an
EPA-approved maintenance plan, the maintenance plan would need to be
revised, and the trigger replaced. (See 71 FR 61250 and 71 FR 61301.)

Based on the downward CO trend, Massachusetts revised the contingency
threshold or “trigger” in its Lowell CO maintenance plan.  The state
plans to cease monitoring for CO in Lowell, and instead, will continue
monitoring for CO in nearby Worcester, and to use these data as a
surrogate for Lowell CO levels. (See attached Figure 2 comparing CO
levels in the two cities.)  Lowell and Worcester are located 42 miles
apart.  Worcester (population 175,011) is somewhat larger than Lowell
(population 103,615) so its CO concentrations can be expected to be
slightly higher due to greater motor vehicle emissions.  Both were
designated nonattainment in 1991 for CO “by operation of law” though
both had design values below the standard at that time.  In both cases,
only the city itself was designated nonattainment since data did not
support an expansion of the nonattainment area.  Both were redesignated
to attainment in 2001, and both measure CO concentrations well below the
standard at this time.

Massachusetts DEP will continue to collect and review CO monitoring data
from nearby Worcester, MA on an on-going basis.  In the event the second
highest CO concentration in any calendar year monitored in Worcester
reaches 75 percent of the federal 1-hour or 8-hour national ambient air
quality standard for CO (35 and 9 ppm, respectively), Massachusetts
will, within 9 months of recording such concentrations, re-establish a
CO monitoring site in Lowell consistent with EPA siting criteria, and
resume analyzing and reporting those data.  Massachusetts will continue
to commit to implement its contingency program in Lowell in the event
that a CO violation (the ‘contingency trigger’) is monitored at the
re-established Lowell monitoring site at any time during the maintenance
period and to consider one or more of the other EPA-approved measures
listed in the 2001 Maintenance Plan for Lowell if necessary to reduce CO
levels.

If the Worcester CO monitor measures a violation of either the federal
1-hour or 8-hour NAAQS for CO prior to the re-establishment of a Lowell
CO monitor, the contingency measures in 2001 Maintenance Plan for Lowell
will be implemented in Lowell, as well as triggering contingency
measures in Worcester under the terms of the existing Maintenance Plan
for Worcester.  The contingency measures in Lowell will continue until a
re-established Lowell CO monitor shows that the area is attainment of
the CO standard.  Worcester contingency measures would continue until
the Worcester CO monitor shows that the Worcester area is in attainment
of the CO standard.

When implementing contingency measures, Massachusetts will review and
implement the measures necessary to remedy the violation, including
transportation control measures (TCM) or other additional vehicle or
fuel controls.

Recommended Action

This SIP revision should be approved.

For the reasons outlined above, EPA agrees that the criteria
Massachusetts DEP will utilize represent a reasonable plan modification
and approach for shutting down a CO monitor that is currently measuring
concentrations well below the existing 1- hour and 8- hour CO national
ambient air quality standards.  The revisions represent an acceptable
alternative contingency triggering mechanism as part of a CO maintenance
plan.  Under this plan, we believe air quality goals can be maintained,
and State monitoring resources, conserved.

Attachment

ATTACHMENT

Figure 1: Carbon Monoxide Trend for Lowell, Massachusetts

Table 1: 5-Year Average Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled from 1990 – 2009

Northern Middlesex Region:

Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

% change over

        Year	                VMT	5-yr period

1990	         6,329,000 	n/a

1995	         6,763,000 	6.9%

2000	         7,261,000 	7.4%

2005	         7,842,000 	8.0%

2009	         7,990,000 	1.9%

Figure 2: Lowell, MA CO Compared to Worcester, MA CO

 U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 Population Estimates

 Ibid

 Data provided by Bob Frey from the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation via e-mail.  The figures are estimated from the Federal
Highway Administration’s Highway Performance Monitoring System and the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s travel demand model, and
represents total daily travel on all roads in the region.  2009 is the
latest year available.

 PAGE

  PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  2


[Federal Register: October 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 63960-63961]
[DOCID:fr28oc08-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-256-000]

Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed J-2 Loop Project and Route
Modification and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

October 21, 2008.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the J-2 Loop \1\ Project,
involving construction and operation of natural gas facilities by
Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin) in Middlesex County,
Massachusetts. The EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-
making process to determine whether the project is in the public
convenience and necessity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A loop is a segment of pipeline installed parallel to an
existing pipeline and connected to the pipeline system at both ends,
allowing more gas to be moved through the pipeline system or
function as a backup system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice announces the opening of the shortened scoping period
for the proposed route modification filed on October 10, 2008, that
will be used to gather environmental input from the public and
interested agencies on the project. The route modification was filed in
response to stakeholder concerns regarding the proposed crossing
location of the Boston and Maine Railroad and is referred to as the
Pearl Street Deviation. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on November 4, 2008. Details on how to
submit comments are provided in the Public Participation section of
this notice.
    On July 3, 2008, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent (NOI)
which announced FERC's initiation of preparing the EA for the J-2 Loop
Project. The NOI provided information about the proposed Project, the
FERC's environmental review process, and requested comments on the
scope of issues to be addressed in the EA. The comment period for the
NOI closed on August 2, 2008.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by an Algonquin representative about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed project facilities. The
pipeline company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable
agreement. However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if
easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, Algonquin could
initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with Massachusetts
state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need to Know?'' addresses a number
of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and
how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is available for
viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Algonquin seeks authorization to construct about 2.3 miles of 14-
inch-diameter pipeline and associated facilities within the cities of
Medford and Somerville, Massachusetts. The project would commence at an
existing meter station adjacent to the Mystic Valley Parkway in Medford
and travel in a general southeast direction within road rights-of-way
to its terminus at an interconnection with NSTAR Gas Company's (NSTAR)
system adjacent to the McGrath Highway/railroad track overpass in
Somerville. A meter station and pig \2\ launcher facility would be
constructed at the existing meter station in Medford and a valve and
pig receiver would be constructed at the interconnect with NSTAR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A pipeline ``pig'' is a device designed to internally clean
or inspect the pipeline. A pig launcher/receiver is an aboveground
facility where pigs are inserted or retrieved from the pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Pearl Street Deviation involves crossing the Boston & Maine
Railroad near milepost 2.0. The Pearl Street Deviation would locate the
pipeline in Skilton Avenue and Pearl Street before rejoining the
original route on Medford Street. The proposed reroute was developed in
consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
to avoid conflicts with a proposed passenger station on the MBTA's
Green Line Extension Project.
    Appendix A presents a detailed map identifying the pipeline
location, including the Pearl Street Deviation, associated with this
project.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) at the
``eLibrary'' link or from the Commission's Public Reference Room at
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the ``Additional Information'' section at the end of this notice.
Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving this
notice in the mail. Requests for detailed maps of the proposed
facilities should be made directly to Algonquin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Algonquin would temporarily disturb about 37 acres to construct the
new pipeline and about 0.6 acres for aboveground facilities. During
operation of the project, Algonquin would affect about 0.33 acres for
pipeline maintenance and about 0.04 acres for aboveground facilities.
    The majority of the J-2 Loop Project would be constructed within
existing roadways, roadside shoulders, and paved parking areas.

The EA Process

    We \4\ are preparing this EA to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) which requires the Commission
to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from
an action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us to discover and
address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is
referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of the scoping process is to
focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By
this notice, we are requesting public comments on the scope of the
issues to be addressed in the EA. All comments received will be
considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the FERC's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project under the following
general headings:
     Geology and soils.
     Cultural resources.
     Land use and visual quality.
     Air quality and noise.
     Alternatives.
     Reliability and safety.
    We note that the proposed pipeline would be within high-density
multi-family residential areas and would require special construction
procedures.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be addressed in the EA.
Depending on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA
may be published for distribution and mailed to Federal, State, and
local agencies; public interest groups; interested individuals;
affected landowners; newspapers and libraries in the project area; and
the Commission's official service list for this proceeding. A comment
period will be allotted for review if the EA is published. We will

consider all comments on the EA before we make our recommendations to
the Commission.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. We are specifically requesting
comments on the relocated facility locations. Your input will help
identify the issues that need to be evaluated in the EA. By becoming a
commenter, your concerns will be addressed in the EA and considered by
the Commission. Your comments should focus on the potential
environmental effects of the proposal, reasonable alternatives
(including alternative locations and routes), and measures to avoid or
lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more
useful they will be. Please carefully follow these instructions to
ensure that your comments are received in time and properly recorded:
     Send an original and two copies of your letter to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE.; Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas
Branch 1;
     Reference Docket No. CP08-256-000;
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before November 4, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments. See Title
18 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Internet Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov under the link to ``Documents and Filings'' and
``eFiling.'' eFiling is a file attachment process and requires that you
prepare your submission in the same manner as you would if filing on
paper, and save it to a file on your computer hard drive. New eFiling
users must first create an account by clicking on ``Sign up'' or
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you are
making. This filing is considered a ``Comment on Filing.'' In addition,
there is a ``Quick Comment'' option available, which is an easy method
for interested persons to submit text only comments on a project. The
Quick-Comment User Guide can be viewed at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-
filing/efiling/quick-comment-guide.pdf. Quick Comment does not require
a FERC eRegistration account; however, you will be asked to provide a
valid email address. All comments submitted under either eFiling or the
Quick Comment option are placed in the public record for the specified
docket.

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding known as an
``intervenor.'' Intervenors play a more formal role in the process.
Among other things, intervenors have the right to receive copies of
case-related Commission documents and filings by other intervenors.
Likewise, each intervenor must send one electronic copy (using the
Commission's eFiling system) or 14 paper copies of its filings to the
Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy of its filings to all
other parties on the Commission's service list for this proceeding. If
you want to become an intervenor, you must file a motion to intervene
according to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (18 CFR 385.214) (see appendix B).\5\ Only intervenors have
the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Interventions may also be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing
comments electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be
granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be
adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor
status to have your environmental comments considered.

Environmental Mailing List

    An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who are
potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily
for project purposes, or who own homes within distances defined in the
Commission's regulations of certain aboveground facilities. We
encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of
this proposed project and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern. If you do not return the form included as appendix C, you will
be removed from the Commission's environmental mailing list.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208 FERC (3372) or on
the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov). Using the
``eLibrary'' link, select ``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu,
enter the selected date range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last
three digits (i.e., CP08-256), and follow the instructions. For
assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at 1-
866-208-3676, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The
eLibrary link on the FERC Internet Web site also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission such as orders,
notices, and rule makings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-25624 Filed 10-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 161 (Monday, August 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51413-51414]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17933]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10131-01-R9]

Revision of Approved State Primacy Program for the State of
Hawaii

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of approval.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the State of Hawaii revised its
approved

State primacy program under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
by adopting regulations that effectuate the federal Phase II/V Chemical
Contaminant Rules (Phase II/V) and the Arsenic Rule. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that Hawaii's revision request
meets the applicable SDWA program revision requirements and the
regulations adopted by Hawaii are no less stringent than the
corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, EPA approves this
revision to Hawaii's approved State primacy program. However, this
determination on Hawaii's request for approval of a program revision
shall take effect in accordance with the procedures described below in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice after the
opportunity to request a public hearing.

DATES: A request for a public hearing must be received or postmarked
September 21, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Documents relating to this determination that were submitted
by Hawaii as part of its program revision request are available for
public inspection online at https://health.hawaii.gov/sdwb/public-notices/. In addition, these documents are available between the hours
of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except official
State holidays, at the following address: Hawaii Department of Health,
Safe Drinking Water Branch, 2385 Waimano Home Road, Uluakupu Building
4, Pearl City, Hawaii 96782. If there are issues accessing the website,
please contact the Safe Drinking Water Branch, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
via email at [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anna Yen, EPA Region 9, Drinking Water
Section; via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email address at
[email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background. EPA approved Hawaii's initial application for primary
enforcement authority (``primacy'') of drinking water systems on
October 20, 1977 (42 FR 47244). Since initial primacy approval, EPA has
approved various revisions to Hawaii's primacy program. For the
revision covered by this action, EPA promulgated the Chemical
Contaminant Rules, collectively referred to as the Phase II/V Rules,
and the Arsenic Rule at 40 CFR Subparts B, C, and G. EPA promulgated
the Phase II/V Rules in multiple phases, with Phase V promulgated on
July 17, 1992 (57 FR 31776), and EPA promulgated the Arsenic Rule on
January 22, 2001 (66 FR 6976). Under the Phase II/V Rules, EPA
regulates over 65 inorganic contaminants, volatile organic
contaminants, and synthetic organic contaminants. Under the Arsenic
Rule, EPA updated the maximum contaminant level for arsenic to better
protect public health. EPA has determined that the Phase II/V and
Arsenic Rule requirements were adopted into the Hawaii Administrative
Rules in a manner that Hawaii's regulations are comparable to and no
less stringent than the federal requirements. EPA has also determined
that the State's program revision request meets all of the regulatory
requirements for approval, as set forth in 40 CFR 142.12, including a
side-by-side comparison of the Federal requirements demonstrating the
corresponding State authorities, additional materials to support
special primacy requirements of 40 CFR 142.16, a review of the
requirements contained in 40 CFR 142.10 necessary for States to attain
and retain primary enforcement responsibility, and a statement by the
Hawaii Attorney General certifying that Hawaii's laws and regulations
to carry out the program revision were duly adopted and are
enforceable. The Attorney General's statement also affirms that there
are no environmental audit privilege and immunity laws that would
impact Hawaii's ability to implement or enforce the Hawaii laws and
regulations pertaining to the program revision. Therefore, EPA approves
this revision of Hawaii's approved State primacy program. The Technical
Support Document, which provides EPA's analysis of Hawaii's program
revision request, is available by submitting a request to the following
email address: [email protected]. Please note ``Technical Support
Document'' in the subject line of the email.
    Public Process. Any interested person may request a public hearing
on this determination. A request for a public hearing must be received
or postmarked before September 21, 2022 and addressed to the Regional
Administrator of EPA Region 9, via the following email address: [email protected], or by contacting the EPA Region 9 contact person
listed above in this notice by telephone if you do not have access to
email. Please note ``State Program Revision Determination'' in the
subject line of the email. The Regional Administrator may deny
frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing. If a timely request
for a public hearing is made, then EPA Region 9 may hold a public
hearing. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following
information: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of the
individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; 2. A
brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional
Administrator's determination and of information that the requesting
person intends to submit at such hearing; and 3. The signature of the
individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of
an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible
official of the organization or other entity.
    If EPA Region 9 does not receive a timely request for a hearing or
a request for a hearing was denied by the Regional Administrator for
being frivolous or insubstantial, and the Regional Administrator does
not elect to hold a hearing on their own motion, EPA's approval shall
become final and effective on September 21, 2022, and no further public
notice will be issued.
    Authority:
    Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
300g-2 (1996), and 40 CFR part 142 of the National Primary Drinking
Water Regulations.

    Dated: August 10, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2022-17933 Filed 8-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P