ppm is monitored in a single ozone season, or a two-year average
fourth-high daily maximum eight-hour ozone concentration of 0.085 ppm
or greater is monitored at any site within the maintenance area. A
Warning Level Response will consist of a study to determine whether the
high ozone level indicates a trend toward higher ozone values or
whether emissions appear to be increasing. The study will evaluate
whether the trend, if any, is likely to continue. If the trend is
likely to continue, the emission control measures necessary to reverse
the trend, taking into consideration the ease and timing for
implementation along with economic and social impacts and issues, will
be determined. Implementation of selected emission controls will take
place as expeditiously as possible, but in no event later than 12
months from the end of the most recent ozone season (September 30). If
new emission controls are needed to reverse the adverse ozone/emissions
trend, the procedures for emission control selection under the Action
Level Response will be followed.
    An Action Level Response will be triggered when a violation of the
1997 eight-hour ozone standard is monitored within the maintenance
area. In the event that the ozone standard violation is not found to be
due to an exceptional event, malfunction, or noncompliance of a source
with a permit condition or rule requirement, IDEM will determine the
additional emission controls needed to assure future attainment of the
eight-hour ozone NAAQS. In this case, emission control measures that
can be implemented in a short time will be selected and will be adopted
and implemented within 18 months from the close of the ozone season in
which the violation of the ozone NAAQS is monitored.
    Adoption of any additional emission control measures prompted by
either of the two response levels will be subject to the necessary
administrative and legal processes dictated by State law. This process
will include publication of public notices, an opportunity for public
hearings, and other measures required by Indiana law for rulemaking by
State environmental boards. If a new emission control measure is
already promulgated and scheduled for implementation at the Federal or
State level, and if that emission control measure is determined to be
sufficient to address the air quality problem or adverse trend,
additional local emission control measures may be determined to be
unnecessary. Indiana will submit to EPA an analysis to demonstrate that
the proposed emission control measures are adequate to return the area
to attainment of the ozone NAAQS. EPA understands that Indiana will
submit any such State-proposed or existing emissions control measure
(if not already included in the SIP) to EPA as a requested SIP
revision.
    Contingency measures contained in the maintenance plan are those
emission controls or other measures that the State chooses to adopt and
implement in response to either an Action Level or a Warning Level
trigger. Possible contingency measures include, but are not limited to,
the following:
    a. Vehicle emission testing program enhancements, including
increased vehicle weight limits, addition of diesel vehicles, etc.;
    b. Asphalt paving (lower VOC formulation requirements);
    c. Diesel exhaust retrofits;
    d. Traffic flow improvements;
    e. Idle reduction programs;
    f. Portable fuel container regulation (statewide);
    g. Park and ride facilities;
    h. Rideshare/carpool programs;
    i. VOC cap-and-trade program for major stationary sources;
    j. Commercial/consumer solvent VOC content limits (statewide); and,
    k. NOX RACT.
    Several aspects of the contingency plan merit further discussion.
First, the plan does not require the adoption and implementation of new
emission controls in the event of a future ozone standard violation if
it can be shown that the ozone standard violation is due

to an exceptional event, source malfunction, or source noncompliance.
If a monitored exceedance is determined to be due to an ``exceptional
event'' (March 22, 2007, 72 FR 13560), it will not be considered in
determining whether a violation has occurred. Since exceptional event
exceedances are not counted against ozone standard violations, EPA
accepts this approach in Indiana's ozone maintenance plan.
    Second, with regard to source malfunctions or source noncompliance,
we note that the Indiana SIP contains provisions for ensuring that
sources take actions to correct malfunctions, as well as provisions for
the State to take enforcement actions against noncompliant sources. See
326 IAC 1-6. EPA believes that this provides a mechanism for the State
to take prompt corrective actions, including expeditious and effective
enforcement actions, to achieve compliance. See an analogous discussion
in the General Preamble, 57 FR 13547 (April 16, 1992). In the context
of section 172(c)(9) contingency measures for sulfur dioxide
(SO2), EPA has interpreted ``contingency measures'' to mean
that the State agency has a comprehensive program to identify sources
of violations of the NAAQS and to undertake an aggressive follow-up for
compliance and enforcement, including expedited procedures for
establishing enforceable consent agreements pending the adoption of
revised SIPs. This type of source-specific noncompliance and correction
by enforcement action in the ozone context is similar to source-
specific SO2 noncompliance and enforcement, and, therefore,
it is appropriate to apply the SO2 guidance in this
circumstance.
5. Has the State Committed To Update the Ozone Maintenance Plan Within
Eight Years After the Redesignation of Lake and Porter Counties To
Attainment of the Eight-Hour Ozone NAAQS?
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Indiana commits to
review its ozone maintenance plan eight years after redesignation of
Lake and Porter Counties to attainment of the 1997 eight-hour ozone
standard and to provide for maintenance of the ozone standard for an
additional 10 years.
6. How Is Indiana's Ozone Maintenance Plan Affected by the Future of
NOX Emission Control Rules in Indiana and in Upwind Areas
Under CAIR and Under the NOX SIP Call?
    EPA has considered the relationship of Indiana's ozone maintenance
plan for Lake and Porter Counties to the emission reductions currently
required pursuant to CAIR. This rule was remanded to EPA,\11\ and the
process of developing a replacement rule is ongoing. However, the
remand of CAIR does not alter the requirements of the NOX
SIP call and the State has now demonstrated, as noted above, that the
area can maintain attainment of the eight-hour ozone standard without
any additional requirements (beyond those required by the
NOX SIP call). In addition, in the July 20, 2009, ozone
maintenance plan supplement, IDEM has confirmed that the State's
NOX SIP call rules remain in effect regardless of the future
of EPA's CAIR replacement rule. Therefore, EPA believes that the
State's demonstration of maintenance under sections 175A and
107(d)(3)(E) remains valid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See footnote 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NOX SIP call requires states to make significant,
specific emissions reductions. It also provided a mechanism, the
NOX Budget Trading Program, which states could use to
achieve those reductions. When EPA promulgated CAIR, it discontinued
(starting in 2009) the NOX Budget Trading Program, 40 CFR
51.121(r), but created another mechanism--the CAIR ozone season trading
program--which states could use to meet their SIP call obligations. EPA
notes that a number of states, when submitting SIP revisions to require
sources to participate in the CAIR ozone season trading program,
removed the SIP provisions that required sources to participate in the
NOX Budget Trading Program. In addition, because the
provisions of CAIR, including the ozone season NOX trading
program, remain in place during the remand, EPA is not currently
administering the NOX Budget Trading Program. Nonetheless,
all states, regardless of the current status of their regulations that
previously required participation in the NOX Budget Trading
Program, will remain subject to all of the requirements in the
NOX SIP call even if the existing CAIR ozone season trading
program is withdrawn or altered. In addition, the anti-backsliding
provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(f) specifically provide that the provisions
of the NOX SIP call, including the statewide NOX
emission budgets, continue to apply after revocation of the one-hour
ozone standard.
    All NOX SIP call states have SIPs that currently satisfy
their obligations under the SIP call, the SIP call reduction
requirements are being met, and EPA will continue to enforce the
requirements of the NOX SIP call even after any response to
the CAIR remand. For these reasons, EPA believes that, regardless of
the status of the CAIR program, the NOX SIP call
requirements can be relied upon in demonstrating maintenance. Here, the
State has demonstrated maintenance based in part on those requirements.
    In addition, LADCO performed a regional modeling analysis to
address the Court's remand of CAIR. This analysis is documented in
LADCO's ``Regional Air Quality Analysis for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional
Haze: Final Technical Support Document (Supplement), September 12,
2008,'' attached to Indiana's June 20, 2009, submittal. LADCO produced
a base year emissions inventory for 2005 and future year emissions
inventories for 2009, 2012, and 2018. To estimate EGU NOX
emissions without implementation of CAIR, LADCO projected EGU
NOX emissions for all states in the modeling domain based on
Energy Information Administration growth rates by state (North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)) and fuel type for the years
2009, 2012, and 2018. The assumed 2007-2018 growth rates were 8.8
percent for Illinois, Iowa, Missouri and Wisconsin; 13.5 percent for
Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan and Ohio; and 15.1 percent for Minnesota.
Emissions were adjusted by applying existing, legally enforceable
control requirements, e.g., consent decrees or state rules.
    EGU NOX emission projections for the States of Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin are shown below in Table 9. The
emission projections used for the modeling analysis do not account for
certain relevant factors, such as emission allowance trading and
potential changes in operation of existing emission control devices.
The NOX emission projections indicate that, due to the
NOX SIP call, certain state rules, consent decrees resulting
from enforcement cases, and ongoing implementation of a number of
mobile source control rules, EGU NOX emissions are expected
to remain relatively constant in Indiana or in any of the states in the
immediate region, and overall NOX emissions in Indiana

and the nearby region are expected to decrease substantially between
2005 and 2018.\12\ Base year and projected total NOX
emissions are shown in Table 10 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ There is more uncertainty about the use of SO2
allowances and future projections for SO2 emissions.
Thus, further review and discussion will be needed regarding the
appropriateness of using these emission projections for future fine
particulate SIP approvals and redesignation requests.

     Table 9--EGU NOX Emissions for the States of Illinois, Indiana,
                      Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin
                             [Tons per Day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Source category              2007     2009     2012     2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU.................................   1,582    1,552    1,516    1,524
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Table 10--Total NOX Emissions for the States of Illinois, Indiana,
                      Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin
                             [Tons per Day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Source category              2005     2009     2012     2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Source Totals...................   8,260    6,778    6,076    4,759
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given that 2007 is one of the years Indiana used to demonstrate
that the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS has been attained in Lake and
Porter Counties and in the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN ozone
nonattainment area, Table 9 shows that EGU emissions will remain below
attainment levels through 2018. Assuming that EGU NOX
emissions will not significantly increase between 2018 and 2020, we
conclude that EGU NOX will remain below attainment levels
through 2020. Furthermore, as shown in Table 10, total NOX
emissions in Indiana and in nearby states are expected to decrease
throughout the maintenance period, through 2020.
    Ozone modeling performed by LADCO using these NOX
emissions and maintenance period VOC emissions supports the conclusion
that the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN area will maintain the 1997
eight-hour ozone standard throughout the maintenance period. Peak
modeled ozone levels in the area for 2009, 2012, and 2018 are 82.2,
80.8, and 77.2 ppb, respectively. These projected ozone levels were
modeled applying only legally enforceable emission controls, e.g.,
source consent decrees, state emission control rules, the
NOX SIP call, Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program
(FMVCP), etc. Because these emission control programs will remain in
place, emission levels, and, therefore, ozone levels, would not be
expected to increase significantly between 2018 and 2020. Given that
projected emissions and modeled ozone levels are expected to decrease
substantively through 2018, it is reasonable to infer that a 2020 ozone
modeling run would also show levels well below the 1997 eight-hour
ozone standard.

VI. Has the State Adopted Acceptable MVEBs for the End Year of the
Ozone Maintenance Period?

A. How Were the MVEBS Developed, and What Are the MVEBS for Lake and
Porter Counties?

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, SIP
revisions and ozone maintenance plans for applicable areas (for ozone
nonattainment areas and for areas seeking redesignation to attainment
of the ozone standard or revising existing ozone maintenance plans).
These emission control SIP revisions (e.g., RFP and attainment
demonstration SIP revisions), including ozone maintenance plans, must
create and document MVEBs based on on-road mobile source emissions
allocated to highway and transit vehicle use that, together with
emissions from other sources in the area, will provide for attainment
or maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
    Under 40 CFR part 93, MVEBs for an area seeking a redesignation to
attainment of the NAAQS are required to be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. In addition, MVEBs can be established for
interim years to provide a quantitative benchmark. If earlier MVEBs are
not established in a SIP, then 40 CFR 93.118(b)(2)(i) provides that a
qualitative finding must be made by the metropolitan planning
organization that there are no factors that would cause or contribute
to a new violation or increase an existing violation in the years
before the last year of the maintenance plan. In this case, Indiana has
submitted emission budgets for both 2010 (an interim year) and 2020
(the last year of the maintenance plan). The MVEBs serve as ceilings on
mobile source emissions from an area's planned transportation system.
The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November
24, 1993 transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble
also describes how to establish the MVEBs in the SIP and how to revise
the MVEBs if needed.
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans,
transportation improvement programs, and new transportation projects,
such as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be
consistent with) the SIP. Conformity to the SIP means that
transportation activities will not cause or contribute to new air
quality standard violations, increase the frequency or severity of
existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. CAA
section 176(c)(1). If a transportation plan does not conform, most new
transportation projects that would expand the capacity of roadways
cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA's
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing SIP revisions containing MVEBs, including attainment
strategies, ROP plans, and maintenance plans, EPA must find that the
MVEBs are ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation
conformity. Once EPA finds the submitted MVEBs to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, the MVEBs are used by the state and
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation plans
and transportation improvement programs conform to the SIP as required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA's criteria for determining the
adequacy of MVEBs are specified in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).

    EPA's process for determining adequacy of MVEBs consists of three
basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEBs during a
public comment period; and, (3) making a finding of adequacy. The
Transportation Conformity Rule, in 40 CFR 93.118(f), provides for MVEB
adequacy finding through two mechanisms. First, 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1)
provides for posting a notice to the EPA conformity Web site (http://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm) and providing a
30-day public comment period. Second, a mechanism is described in 40
CFR 93.118(f)(2) which provides that EPA can review the adequacy of an
implementation plan MVEB simultaneously with its review of the
implementation plan itself. In this action, EPA is using the second
mechanism in 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2), and is taking comment on both the
adequacy and approvability of the submitted MVEBs.
    The Lake and Porter Counties' ozone maintenance plan contains VOC
and NOX MVEBs for 2020 and 2010. The State has the option of
setting budgets for earlier years in the maintenance plan in addition
to the last year of the maintenance plan. EPA is taking comment on both
the adequacy and the approvability of the submitted VOC and
NOX MVEBs for Lake and Porter Counties. Any and all comments
on the adequacy and approvability of the MVEBs should be submitted
during the comment period stated in the DATES section of this notice.
    EPA intends to make its determination of the adequacy of the 2010
and 2020 MVEBs for Lake and Porter Counties for transportation
conformity purposes in the final rulemaking on the eight-hour ozone
redesignation. If EPA finds the 2010 and 2020 MVEBs adequate and
approves the MVEBs in the final rulemaking action, the new MVEBs must
be used for future transportation conformity determinations. The new
MVEBs, if found adequate and approved in the final rulemaking, will be
effective the date of publication of EPA's final rulemaking in the
Federal Register. For required regional emissions analysis years that
involve 2010 or beyond, the applicable budgets are defined in the table
below.

               Table 11--Lake and Porter County Area MVEBs
                             [Tons per Day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Year                             VOC      NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010..................................................    10.5     40.6
2020..................................................     6.0     12.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These MVEBs are the on-road mobile source VOC and NOX
emissions for Lake and Porter Counties for 2010 and 2020. The on-road
mobile source emissions were derived using the Northwestern Indiana
Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) travel demand model and EPA's
MOBILE6.2 mobile source emission factor model, with source growth
estimates provided in NIRPC's 2030 Long Range Plan, adopted by NIRPC on
June 21, 2007.
    EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for both 2020 and 2010, as
part of the eight-hour ozone maintenance plan. EPA has determined that
the emission budgets are consistent with the control measures in the
SIP and that Lake and Porter Counties can maintain attainment of the
1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS (projected VOC and NOX emissions
in total for 2010 and 2020 remain below the attainment year, 2006,
levels with or without CAIR) for the required 10-year maintenance
period with mobile source emissions at the levels of the MVEBs. EPA has
reviewed these MVEBs in light of the remand of CAIR and concluded that
the budgets meet the conformity rule's adequacy criteria found at 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4). In particular, EPA has concluded that the MVEBs
satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv), which requires
that MVEBs, when considered together with all other emissions, is
consistent with applicable requirements for maintenance. EPA bases this
conclusion on the overall reduction in VOC and NOX emissions
from all sources which are documented as part of the ozone maintenance
plan.
    It should be noted that the one-hour ozone MVEBs, which were
approved as part of the one-hour ozone attainment demonstration, will
continue to be used for transportation conformity purposes until these
budgets are found adequate and approved. The current one-hour ozone
emission budgets that are being used for transportation conformity
purposes are for 2007, and cap emissions at 12.37 tons per day for VOC
and 63.33 tons per day for NOX. When the eight-hour ozone
maintenance plan MVEBs are approved and found adequate, the new 2010
and 2020 emission budgets will provide lower caps on mobile source
emissions in Lake and Porter Counties because the new emission budgets
are lower than the current 2007 MVEBs.
    It should finally be noted that the 2010 and 2020 MVEBs exceed the
on-road mobile source VOC and NOX emissions projected by
IDEM for 2010 and 2020 as summarized above. Through discussions with
all organizations involved in transportation planning for Lake and
Porter Counties, IDEM decided to include safety margins of five percent
in the MVEBs to provide for mobile source growth not anticipated in the
projected 2010 and 2020 emissions, allowing for a margin of error in
the calculation of future mobile source emissions. Indiana has
demonstrated that Lake and Porter Counties can maintain the 1997 eight-
hour ozone NAAQS with these mobile source emissions since total 2010
and 2020 VOC and NOX emissions in Lake and Porter Counties,
including the increased mobile source emissions, will remain under the
attainment year emission levels.

B. Are the MVEBs Adequate and Approvable for Use in Conformity
Determinations?

    The submitted MVEBs will meet the criteria for adequacy when EPA
addresses the ozone maintenance plan through a final rule. EPA has
reviewed the submitted MVEBs and the SIP and is proposing to approve
the budgets because, in part, the budgets meet the adequacy criteria in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) as discussed below. Additionally, EPA has reviewed
the entire maintenance plan and has concluded that the maintenance plan
is approvable.
    The MVEBs are clearly identified and precisely quantified in the
submitted SIP revision. The MVEBs, when considered together with all
emissions from other sources in Lake and Porter Counties, are
consistent with applicable requirements for maintenance. The MVEBs are
consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and the
control measures in the submitted ozone maintenance plan; and the
established safety margins are within the allowable emission limits.
    The 2010 and 2020 VOC and NOX MVEBs for Lake and Porter
Counties are approvable because the MVEBs will meet all of the above
criteria and maintain the total VOC and NOX emissions for
Lake and Porter Counties at or below the attainment year emission
levels, as required by the transportation conformity regulations. We
are proposing to find these MVEBs to be adequate and to approve these
MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes.

VII. What Is the Base Year Emissions Inventory, and Is Indiana's
Approvable?

    The CAA gives the states the responsibility to inventory emissions
contributing to the violation of a NAAQS, to track these emissions over
time, and to ensure that emission control strategies have been
implemented and have achieved planned emission targets. States
containing ozone nonattainment areas are required, under section
182(a)(1) of the CAA, to submit comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventories of actual ozone precursor emissions (emissions of VOC and
NOX) for each ozone nonattainment area. These emission
inventories must include emissions from point, area, on-road mobile,
and non-road mobile man-made (anthropogenic) and biogenic (natural or
plant-generated) sources in the ozone nonattainment areas. The emission
inventories must specify emissions for typical summer weekdays.
    Two EPA guidance documents have been developed to cover the
emissions reviewed here. First, a November 18, 2002 memorandum (``2002
Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning: 8-hr Ozone, PM2.5
and Regional Haze Programs,'' memorandum from Lydia N. Wegman,
Director, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, and Peter
Tsirigotis, Director, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division)
established 2002 as the base year to be used in the current round of
ozone, fine particulates (PM2.5), and haze control planning.
Second, SIP emissions inventory guidance, including guidance specific
to the base year emissions, is given in an August 2005 EPA guidance
document, (``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA-454/R-05-001).
    On March 26, 2007, IDEM submitted documentation of 2002 statewide
emissions of VOC, NOX, and CO in response to an EPA request
for the documentation of the base year emissions. The 2002 statewide
emissions, documented by county, were prepared to comply with EPA's
Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR), published on June 10,
2002 (67 FR 39602) (40 CFR part 51 subparts A and Q). Also included
with the March 26, 2007, submittal was a compact disk containing
detailed emissions data, including input data used to calculate the
emissions.
    Emissions contained in the March 26, 2007, submittal cover the
general source categories of point sources, area sources, on-road
mobile sources, non-road mobile sources, and biogenic sources. All
emission summaries were accompanied by source-specific descriptions of
emission calculation procedures and sources of input data, along with
sample calculations for various counties in the State.
    To determine point source emissions, the State relied on data
collected from source facilities complying with the State's annual
emissions reporting requirements, 326 IAC 2-6. Major sources of any
criteria pollutant located anywhere in the State of Indiana are
required to annually submit to the State data specifying their annual
emissions of criteria pollutants along with seasonal source activity
information to allow the calculation of seasonal emissions. Emissions
for any particular year are to be reported by April 15th of the
following year. In Elkhart, Floyd, Lake, Marion, Porter, St. Joseph,
and Vanderburgh Counties, sources with the potential to emit more than
10 tons per year of VOC or NOX must report annually. In
other portions of the State, the reporting source size emissions cutoff
is 100 tons per year.
    Point source emissions reporting submittals are checked by IDEM to
assure completeness. If the data are determined to be complete, the
emissions data are loaded into the State's emissions database. IDEM
also reviews the data for quality assurance, and, if needed, sources
are requested to correct the data. After completing data quality
assurance, the point source data are submitted to EPA for incorporation
into the NEI, as required by the CERR.
    The March 26, 2007, submittal includes VOC, NOX, and CO
emissions for each reporting facility statewide. The supplied data
files document a number of source-specific data used to determine the
emissions.
    Area source emissions were calculated using a variety of
information sources and guidance from EPA. A primary source of
calculation procedures and applied guidance was EPA's Emission
Inventory Improvement Program. Where appropriate, point source
emissions were subtracted from the calculated area source emissions to
account for source coverage overlap with the reported point source
emissions and to avoid double counting of emissions in the emissions
totals. The documentation supplied in the March 26, 2007, submittal
shows how the county-specific emissions were calculated for each area
source category. County-specific source surrogates and associated
emission factors were generally used to calculate county-specific
emissions. Samples of area source emission calculations were provided
for selected Counties. Area source emissions for all 92 Indiana
Counties were documented in the March 26, 2007, submittal and in the
data files included in the accompanying data disk.
    The base year emission inventory documentation included a detailed
description of the procedures and input data used to determine the
mobile source emissions for Lake and Porter Counties for 2002. The
emissions submittal documents the mobile source VOC, CO, and
NOX emissions for each of the counties in the State. The
March 26, 2007, submittal notes that the mobile source emissions for
Lake and Porter Counties were derived by the Northwest Indiana Regional
Planning Commission, whereas, the mobile source emissions for all other
counties were obtained from EPA's NEI.
    Non-road mobile source VOC, NOX, and CO emissions for
2002 were generated by the National Mobile Inventory Model. To update
and quality assure the emissions for locomotives, commercial and
recreational marine sources, and off-road mobile equipment sources,
LADCO contracted with several consultants to update source population
and distribution levels. Summaries of the consultants' results and
recommended emissions changes were included in the March 26, 2007,
submittal. This submittal documented non-road mobile VOC,
NOX, and CO emissions by county for all 92 Counties in
Indiana.
    Biogenic VOC, NOX, and CO emissions for 2002 were taken
directly from the NEI for each county in Indiana.
    The March 26, 2007, submittal documents 2002 VOC, CO, and
NOX emissions for each Indiana county in units of tons per
year and tons per summer day. The 2002 summer day emissions of VOC,
NOX, and CO for Lake and Porter Counties are summarized in
Table 12.

  Table 12--2002 Ozone Precursor Emissions in Lake and Porter Counties,
                                 Indiana
                          [Tons per Summer Day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Source category                  VOC       NOX       CO
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake County:
    Point.................................     19.88    106.33    466.11
    Area..................................     24.78      4.37      3.93
    On-Road Mobile........................     15.35     40.15    186.39
    Non-Road Mobile.......................     20.18     28.82    176.98
    Biogenic..............................     18.59      0.79      1.91
                                           -----------------------------
        Total.............................     98.78    180.46    835.32
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Porter County:
    Point.................................      4.70     80.11    405.01
    Area..................................      7.49      1.35      1.35
    On-Road Mobile........................      4.85     14.95     63.66
    Non-Road Mobile.......................     12.80     11.37     73.19
    Biogenic..............................     15.15      0.63      1.63
                                           -----------------------------
        Total.............................     44.99    108.41    544.84
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2002 emissions for Lake and Porter Counties were the primary
source of emissions data used to project the attainment year (2006) and
maintenance period (2010 and 2020) VOC and NOX emissions
discussed in the State's June 5, 2009, ozone redesignation request,
which was subject to public hearing. Since this ozone redesignation
request and ozone maintenance plan, including the 2002 VOC and
NOX emission totals for Lake and Porter Counties, were
discussed during a public hearing, we believe that the 2002 base year
VOC and NOX emissions for Lake and Porter Counties have been
addressed by a public hearing. The March 26, 2007, documentation of the
2002 VOC and NOX emissions inventory was included as an
appendix of the June 5, 2009, ozone redesignation request
documentation.
    We find the documentation of the 2002 VOC, NOX, and CO
emissions to be acceptable, and we are proposing here to approve the
2002 VOC and NOX emissions inventories for Lake and Porter
Counties as a revision of the Indiana SIP.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Although CO emissions were included in the 2002 emissions
documentation submitted on March 26, 2007, CO emissions play a
minimal role in the formation of ground-level ozone. As such, we are
not including CO emissions in the 2002 emissions inventory proposed
for approval as a revision of the Indiana SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. What Are EPA's Proposed Actions?

    The State of Indiana has submitted acceptable 2002 VOC and
NOX emission inventories for Lake and Porter Counties.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve these emission inventories as a
revision of Indiana's ozone SIP pursuant to section 182(a)(1) of the
CAA.
    EPA has evaluated Indiana's ozone redesignation request and has
determined that it meets the redesignation criteria of section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve
Indiana's ozone redesignation request for Lake and Porter Counties for
the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS. Final approval of the redesignation
request would change the official designation of Lake and Porter
Counties for the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment.
    Finally, EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's ozone maintenance
plan for Lake and Porter Counties as a revision of the Indiana ozone
SIP because it meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. Final
approval would thus incorporate into the Indiana SIP a plan for
maintaining the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS through 2020. The
maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy possible
future violations of the 1997 eight-hour ozone NAAQS, and establishes
MVEBs of 10.5 tons per day for VOC and 40.6 tons per day for
NOX for 2010 and 6.0 tons per day for VOC and 12.6 tons per
day for NOX for 2020. EPA is proposing to find adequate and
approve these MVEBs.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not impose any
new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that
affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new
regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements
under state law, and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by state law, it 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).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Redesignation is
an action that merely affects the status of a geographical area, does
not impose any new requirements on sources, or allows a state to avoid
adopting or implementing other requirements, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the CAA.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will 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, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

    This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. In
reviewing program submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Absent a prior
existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a program submission for
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of
a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the
CAA. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a
geographical area but does not impose any new requirements on sources.
Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 25, 2010.
Walter W. Kovalick, Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010-5112 Filed 3-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 4 (Monday, January 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 937]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00021]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR13-18-000]

Kansas Gas Service, a Division of ONEOK, Inc.; Notice of Petition
for Rate Approval

    Take notice that on December 14, 2012, Kansas Gas Service, a
division of ONEOK, Inc. (KGS) filed pursuant to 284.123 of the
Commissions regulations to revise the rates, terms and conditions of
its interstate interruptible transportation service to conform to the
recently revised rates and terms of service approved by the Kansas
Corporation Commission for intrastate wholesale transportation service,
as more fully detailed in the petition.
    Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing 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). Protests will be considered
by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken,
but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2013.

    Dated: December 26, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00021 Filed 1-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24476-24477]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10609]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971; FRL-9200-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards
for Aerosol Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection
Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is
scheduled to expire on September 30, 2011. Before submitting the ICR to
OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection as described below.

DATES: Comments may be submitted on or before July 1, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0971 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket Information Center, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.; Mail Code: 28221T, Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: To send comments or documents through a
courier service, the address to use is: EPA Docket Center, Public
Reading Room, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are accepted only during the
Docket's normal hours of operation--8:30 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through
Friday. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0971. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise to be protected through http://www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means we will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to us without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  J. Kaye Whitfield, Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code
E143-03, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?

    The EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971 which is available either electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in-person viewing at the Air Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. The EPA/DC
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone for the Reading Room is
202-566-1744, and the telephone for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use http://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What information particularly interests EPA?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii) 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;
    (iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
    (iv) 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. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.

To what information collection activity or ICR does this apply?

    Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
manufacturers, distributors, and importers of aerosol coatings. These
affected entities fall within the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) Code 32551, ``Paint and Coating
Manufacturing'' and NAICS Code 325998 ``All Other Miscellaneous
Chemical Production and Preparation Manufacturing''.
    Title: National Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emission Standards
for Aerosol Coatings (40 CFR Part 59, Subpart E).
    ICR number: EPA ICR Number 2289.02, OMB Control Number 2060-0617.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on September
30, 2011. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract:
    The EPA is required, under section 183(e) of the CAA, to regulate
volatile organic compounds emissions from the use of consumer and
commercial products. Pursuant to section 183(e)(3), EPA published a
list of consumer and commercial products and a schedule for their
regulation (60 FR 15264). Aerosol coatings were included on the list,
and the standards for such coatings are codified at 40 CFR part 59,
subpart E. The reports required under the standards enable EPA to
identify coating formulations manufactured, imported or distributed in
the United States, and to determine the product-weighted reactivity.
The ICR addresses the burden for activities conducted in three years
increments after promulgation of the national volatile organic compound
(VOC) emission standards for aerosol coatings. The regulated entities
read instructions to determine how they were affected by the rule. New
and existing regulated entities submit an initial notification.
Regulated entities are required to submit notifications of changes in
the products or company information and to maintain records. In
addition, regulated entities are required to submit triennial reports
of formulation data and VOC usage.
    Burden Statement:
    The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 199 hours per
respondent over the course of the 3 year triennial reporting period.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    The bottom line respondent burden hours and cost are calculated by
summing all costs for the reporting activities and the total costs for
the recordkeeping activities over the course of the three year
triennial reporting period. The annual average burden and costs for the
first 3 years are 12,100 hours and $857,331. The annual average burden
equals the sum of the burden hours in Years 1 (12,189), 2(8359), and 3
(15,818), divided by 3. The average costs equals the sum of the average
costs in Years 1 (862,764), 2(578,545), and 3 (1,130,685), divided by
3.
    The average burden hours per respondent equals the total average
burden (12,100) divided by the average number of respondents (61), or
about 199 hours per respondent. The total average cost per respondent
equals the total average cost ($857,331) divided by the total
respondents (61), or about $14,000.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 61.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
One or less per year.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 199 hours, averaged over 3
years. This estimate includes triennial reporting requirements.
    Estimated total annual costs: $860,000. This includes the estimated
average annual cost including triennial reporting, an estimated burden
cost of $ 0, and an estimated cost of $ 0 for capital investment or
maintenance and operational costs.

Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There are no changes being made to the estimates in this ICR from
what EPA estimated in the currently approved ICR.

What is the next step in the process for this icr?

    The EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: April 20, 2011.
Steve Fruh,
Acting Director, Sector Policies and Programs Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-10609 Filed 4-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 209)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56098-56101]
[DOCID:fr30oc09-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1000; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-164-AD;
Amendment 39-16070; AD 2008-10-07 R1]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-
100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP
Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an existing airworthiness directive (AD),
which applies to all Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-
200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP series airplanes.
That AD currently requires revising the FAA-approved maintenance
program by incorporating new airworthiness limitations (AWLs) for fuel
tank systems to satisfy Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88
requirements. That AD also requires the initial inspection of certain
repetitive AWL inspections to phase in those inspections, and repair if
necessary. This AD clarifies the intended effect of the AD on spare and
on-airplane fuel tank system components. This AD results from a design
review of the fuel tank systems. We are issuing this AD to prevent the
potential for ignition sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent
failures, alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in
combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank
explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective November 16, 2009.
    On June 12, 2008 (73 FR 25977, May 8, 2008), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain
publication listed in the AD.
    We must receive any comments on this AD by December 14, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; 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 Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Bryant, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 917-6505; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On April 28, 2008, we issued AD 2008-10-07, amendment 39-15513 (73
FR 25977, May 8, 2008). That AD applies to all Boeing Model 747-100,
747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR,
and 747SP series airplanes. That AD requires revising the FAA-approved
maintenance program by incorporating new airworthiness limitations
(AWLs) for fuel tank systems to satisfy Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 88 requirements. That AD also requires the initial
inspection of certain repetitive AWL inspections to phase in those
inspections, and repair if necessary. That AD resulted from a design
review of the fuel tank systems. The actions specified in that AD are
intended to prevent the potential for ignition sources inside fuel
tanks caused by latent failures, alterations, repairs, or maintenance
actions, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in a fuel tank

explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.
    Critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) are
limitation requirements to preserve a critical ignition source
prevention feature of the fuel tank system design that is necessary to
prevent the occurrence of an unsafe condition. The purpose of a CDCCL
is to provide instruction to retain the critical ignition source
prevention feature during configuration change that may be caused by
alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions. A CDCCL is not a periodic
inspection.

Actions Since AD Was Issued

    Since we issued that AD, we have determined that it is necessary to
clarify the AD's intended effect on spare and on-airplane fuel tank
system components, regarding the use of maintenance manuals and
instructions for continued airworthiness.
    Section 91.403(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
91.403(c) specifies the following:

    No person may operate an aircraft for which a manufacturer's
maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness has
been issued that contains an airworthiness limitation section unless
the mandatory * * * procedures * * * have been complied with.

    Some operators have questioned whether existing components affected
by the new CDCCLs must be reworked. We did not intend for the AD to
retroactively require rework of components that had been maintained
using acceptable methods before the effective date of the AD. Owners
and operators of the affected airplanes therefore are not required to
rework affected components identified as airworthy or installed on the
affected airplanes before the required revisions of the FAA-approved
maintenance program. But once the CDCCLs are incorporated into the FAA-
approved maintenance program, future maintenance actions on components
must be done in accordance with those CDCCLs.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we
are issuing this AD to revise AD 2008-10-07. This new AD retains the
requirements of the existing AD, and adds a new note to clarify the
intended effect of the AD on spare and on-airplane fuel tank system
components.

Explanation of Additional Change to AD

    AD 2008-10-07 allowed the use of alternative inspections,
inspection intervals, and CDCCLs if they are part of a later revision
of the Boeing 747-100/200/300/SP Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D6-13747-CMR, Revision
March 2008. AD 2008-10-07 also allowed use of later revisions of Boeing
747-100/200/300/SP Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification
Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D6-13747-CMR, Revision March 2008.
Those provisions have been removed from this AD. Allowing the use of
``a later revision'' of a specific service document violates Office of
the Federal Register policies for approving materials that are
incorporated by reference. Affected operators, however, may request
approval to use an alternative inspection, inspection interval, or
CDCCL that is part of a later revision of the referenced service
document as an alternative method of compliance, under the provisions
of paragraph (k) of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    This revision imposes no additional economic burden. The current
costs for this AD are repeated for the convenience of affected
operators, as follows:
    There are about 308 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs, at
an average labor rate of $80 per work hour, for U.S. operators to
comply with this AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
            Action               Work hours          Parts           Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                                     airplane        airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance program revision.               8  None.............            $640              93         $59,520
Inspections..................               8  None.............             640              93          59,520
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    This revision merely clarifies the intended effect on spare and on-
airplane fuel tank system components, and makes no substantive change
to the AD's requirements. For this reason, it is found that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment for this action are unnecessary,
and good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2009-1000; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-164-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

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 have 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 the regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (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 removing amendment 39-15513 (73 FR
25977, May 8, 2008) and adding the following new AD:

2008-10-07 R1 Boeing: Amendment 39-16070. Docket No. FAA-2009-1000;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-164-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective November 16,
2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD revises AD 2008-10-07.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-
100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP
series airplanes, certificated in any category.

    Note 1:  This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes
that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the
areas addressed by these inspections, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the inspections described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must
request approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
according to paragraph (k) of this AD. The request should include a
description of changes to the required inspections that will ensure
the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a design review of the fuel tank
systems. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential for
ignition sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent failures,
alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion
and consequent loss of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Restatement of AD 2008-10-07 With Changes to Compliance Method: Service
Information Reference

    (f) The term ``Revision March 2008 of Document D6-13747-CMR,''
as used in this AD, means Boeing 747-100/200/300/SP Airworthiness
Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMRs), D6-13747-CMR, Revision March 2008. (For the purposes of
Revision March 2008 of Document D6-13747-CMR, the Model 747SR series
airplane is basically a Model 747-100 series airplane with certain
modifications to improve fatigue life.)

Maintenance Program Revision

    (g) Before December 16, 2008, revise the FAA-approved
maintenance program to incorporate the information in Section D,
``AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS--SYSTEMS,'' AWLs No. 28-AWL-01 through
No. 28-AWL-19 inclusive, of Revision March 2008 of Document D6-
13747-CMR; except that the initial inspections required by paragraph
(h) of this AD must be done at the applicable compliance time
specified in that paragraph. As an optional action, AWLs No. 28-AWL-
20 through No. 28-AWL-23 inclusive, as identified in Section D of
Revision March 2008 of Document D6-13747-CMR, also may be
incorporated into the FAA-approved maintenance program.

Initial Inspections and Repair if Necessary

    (h) Do the inspections specified in Table 1 of this AD at the
compliance time specified in Table 1 of this AD, and repair any
discrepancy, in accordance with Section D of Revision March 2008 of
Document D6-13747-CMR. The repair must be done before further
flight. Accomplishing the inspections identified in Table 1 of this
AD as part of an FAA-approved maintenance program before the
applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 of this AD
constitutes compliance with the requirements of this paragraph.

    Note 2:  For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

    Note 3:  For the purposes of this AD, a special detailed
inspection is: ``An intensive examination of a specific item,
installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. The examination is likely to make extensive use of
specialized inspection techniques and/or equipment. Intricate
cleaning and substantial access or disassembly procedure may be
required.''

                      Table 1--Initial Inspections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Compliance time (whichever
                                                  occurs later)
       AWL No.           Description   ---------------------------------
                                           Threshold       Grace period
------------------------------------------------------------------------
28-AWL-01............  A detailed       Within 144       Within 72
                        inspection of    months since     months after
                        external wires   the date of      June 12, 2008
                        over the         issuance of      (the effective
                        center fuel      the original     date of AD
                        tank for         standard         2008-10-07).
                        damaged          airworthiness
                        clamps, wire     certificate or
                        chafing, and     the date of
                        wire bundles     issuance of
                        in contact       the original
                        with the         export
                        surface of the   certificate of
                        center fuel      airworthiness.
                        tank.

28-AWL-03............  A special        Within 144       Within 24
                        detailed         months since     months after
                        inspection of    the date of      June 12, 2008.
                        the lightning    issuance of
                        shield to        the original
                        ground           standard
                        termination on   airworthiness
                        the out-of-      certificate or
                        tank fuel        the date of
                        quantity         issuance of
                        indicating       the original
                        system to        export
                        verify           certificate of
                        functional       airworthiness.
                        integrity.
28-AWL-13............  A special        Within 144       Within 60
                        detailed         months since     months after
                        inspection of    the date of      June 12, 2008.
                        the fault        issuance of
                        current bond     the original
                        of the fueling   standard
                        shutoff valve    airworthiness
                        actuator of      certificate or
                        the center       the date of
                        wing tank to     issuance of
                        verify           the original
                        electrical       export
                        bond.            certificate of
                                         airworthiness.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

No Alternative Inspections, Inspection Intervals, or Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    (i) After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD, no alternative inspections, inspection
intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless the inspections, intervals,
or CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (k) of this AD.

Credit for Actions Done According to Previous Revisions of the Service
Information

    (j) Actions done before the June 12, 2008, in accordance with
Boeing 747-100/200/300/SP Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and
Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), D6-13747-CMR,
Revision March 2006; Revision May 2006; Revision December 2006;
Revision January 2007; Revision September 2007; or Revision January
2008; are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

New Information

Explanation of CDCCL Requirements

    Note 4:  Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational
requirements, components that have been identified as airworthy or
installed on the affected airplanes before the revision of the FAA-
approved maintenance program, as required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, do not need to be reworked in accordance with the CDCCLs.
However, once the FAA-approved maintenance program has been revised,
future maintenance actions on these components must be done, in
accordance with the CDCCLs.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Douglas Bryant, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-
140S, FAA, Seattle ACO, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests-faa.gov.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (l) You must use Boeing 747-100/200/300/SP Airworthiness
Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance Requirements
(CMRs), D6-13747-CMR, Revision March 2008, to do the actions
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing 747-100/200/300/SP
Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) and Certification Maintenance
Requirements (CMRs), D6-13747-CMR, Revision March 2008, on June 12,
2008 (73 FR 25977, May 8, 2008).
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 22, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-26123 Filed 10-29-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


        UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                           WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

TXR# 0054486

DP BARCODE: D327215

3/15/07

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	PC 079401: Endosulfan – Developmental Neurotoxicity Feeding
Study in Rats with Endosulfan [MRID# 46968301].

 ADVANCE \d0 FROM:		David G Anderson, Ph.D., Toxicologist

and

Judy Facey, Ph.D., Toxicologist

RRB-2, HED (7509P)

 ADVANCE \d1 TO:			Tracy Perry

 ADVANCE \d1 SRRD (7508P)

 ADVANCE \d7 THROUGH:	Mary Elissa Reaves, Ph.D., Toxicologist

RRB-2, HED (7509P)

Bayer CropScience submitted a Developmental Neurotoxicity Feeding Study
in the Rat with Endosulfan [MRID# 46968301] for the Endosulfan Task
Force [ETF].

Summary:  In a developmental neurotoxicity study (MRID 46968301),
endosulfan (99.1% a.i, batch# EGPC400349)] was administered to 30 female
Wistar Crl:WI (Han) rats per group in the diet at dose levels of 0,
50,150, or 400 ppm or 0, 3.74, 10.8 or 29.8 mg/kg bw/day from gestation
day 6 through postnatal day 21.

		The NOAEL for dams is 10.8 mg/kg/day.  The LOAEL is 29.8 mg/kg/day
based on decrease body weight, food consumption and food efficiency.

		There was no NOAEL for pups.  The LOAEL was the LDT at 3.74 mg/kg/day
based on decreased pup weight on PND 11 and decreased weight gain at PND
4-11.  At the MDT, possible delayed preputial separation in males
occurred.  No neurotoxic effects were seen at the LDT or MDT.  Possible
effects were shown at the HDT for PND 21 male rearing in the FOB [within
historical control range], PND 21 male fixed perfused brains and a 0.158
mm statistically significant decrease in female morphometric
measurements on the PND 21 hippocampal gyrus at the HDT, the only dose
level measured [control 1.623 mm, HDT 1.469 mm, p<0.05], but these
values in control and at the HDT were within historical control range of
1.38 to 1.69 mm.  These possible neurotoxic related effects could be
biologically significant and treatment related at higher doses, but are
not definitively shown in this study at the HDT.

	This study is classified ACCEPTABLE and satisfies the guideline
requirement for a developmental neurotoxicity study in rats (OPPTS
870.6300, 83-6); OECD 426 (draft).

COMPLIANCE:  Signed and dated GLP, Quality Assurance, and Data
Confidentiality statements were provided.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44299-44300]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14803]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-11113-02-OA; EPA-HQ-OEJECR-2023-0101]

National Environmental Justice Advisory Council; Notification of
Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification for a public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby provides notice that
the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) will meet
on the dates and times described below. The meeting is open to the
public. Due to unforeseen administrative circumstances, EPA is
announcing this meeting with less than 15 calendar days public notice.
For additional information about registering to attend the meeting or
to provide public comment, please see Registration under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. Pre-Registration is required.

DATES: The NEJAC will convene a hybrid in-person public meeting with a
virtual option. The public meeting will start on Tuesday, July 25,
2023, at approximately 2 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Time. The NEJAC
meeting continues Wednesday, July 26, 2023, from approximately 9 a.m.
to 7 p.m. through Thursday, July 27, 2023, from approximately 9:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m., Eastern Time. A public comment period relevant to current
NEJAC charges and recommendations will be considered by the NEJAC at
the meeting on Wednesday, July 26, 2023 (see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION). Members

of the public who wish to participate during the public comment period
must register by 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, July 19, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The NEJAC meeting will be held at the Sheraton Puerto Rico,
200 Convention Blvd., San Juan, PR 00907.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula Flores-Gregg, NEJAC Designated
Federal Officer, U.S. EPA; email: [email protected]; telephone: (214) 665-
8123. Additional information about the NEJAC is available at https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/national-environmental-justice-advisory-council.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Charter of the NEJAC states that the
advisory committee ``will provide independent advice and
recommendations to the Administrator about broad, cross-cutting issues
related to environmental justice. The NEJAC's efforts will include
evaluation of a broad range of strategic, scientific, technological,
regulatory, community engagement and economic issues related to
environmental justice.''
    Registration: Individual registration is required for the public
meeting. No two individuals can share the same registration link.
Information on how to register is located at https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/national-environmental-justice-advisory-council-
meetings. Registration to attend the meeting is available through the
scheduled meeting days. The deadline to sign up to speak during the
public comment period will close at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, July 19,
2023. When registering, please provide your name, organization, city
and state, and email address. Please also indicate whether you would
like to provide oral public comment during the meeting, or whether you
are submitting written comments at time of registration.

A. Public Comment

    The meeting discussions will focus on several topics including, but
not limited to, workgroup activity, final recommendations for council
consideration, presentations and charges created through collaborations
with various EPA national program offices. The NEJAC is interested in
receiving public comments relevant to the following charges and
recommendations:

(1) Recommendations for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)/309
Training
(2) Recommendations for Water Infrastructure Technical Assistance
(3) Cumulative Impacts Framework Charge
(4) Farmworker and Pesticides Charge
(5) Environmental and Climate Justice Program Funding Opportunities:
What infrastructure projects and capacity building activities provide
the most beneficial impact within Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands?
What has kept organizations from applying for funding?

    Individuals or groups making remarks during the oral public comment
period will be limited to three (3) minutes. Please be prepared to
briefly describe your comments; including your recommendations on what
you want the NEJAC to advise the EPA to do. Submitting written comments
for the record are strongly encouraged. You can submit your written
comments in three different ways, (1) by using the webform at https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/forms/national-environmental-justice-advisory-council-nejac-public-comment, (2) by sending comments via
email to [email protected] and (3) by creating comments in the Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OEJECR-2023-0101 at https://www.regulations.gov. Written
comments can be submitted through August 9, 2023. More information
about the NEJAC's current charges can be found here.

B. Information About Services for Individuals With Disabilities or
Requiring English Language Translation Assistance

    For information about access or services for individuals requiring
assistance, please contact Paula Flores-Gregg, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via
email at [email protected]. To request special accommodations for a
disability or other assistance, please submit your request at least
fourteen (14) working days prior to the meeting, to give EPA sufficient
time to process your request. All requests should be sent to the email
or phone number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Lilian Dorka,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for External Civil Rights, Office of
Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights.
[FR Doc. 2023-14803 Filed 7-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 51976]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18233]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project/Docket No. CP22-493-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Waiver Period
for Water Quality Certification Application

    On July 22, 2022, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C. submitted
to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a copy of its
application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality
certification filed with Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation, in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant
to 40 CFR 121.6 and section 157.22 of the Commission's regulations,\1\
we hereby notify the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation of the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 157.22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Date of Receipt of the Certification Request: July 22, 2022.
    Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request: July
22, 2023.
    If the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation fails
or refuses to act on the water quality certification request on or
before the above date, then the agency certifying authority is deemed
waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.
1341(a)(1).

    Dated: August 18, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-18233 Filed 8-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P