[Federal Register: July 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 142)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36943-36948]
[DOCID:fr27jy09-5]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0501; FRL-8934-2]

National Oil and Hazardous Substance; Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct Final Notice of Deletion of the Southern California
Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site from the National Priorities
List.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX, is
publishing a Direct Final Notice of Deletion for the Southern
California Edison (SCE), Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site (Site)
located in northeastern Visalia, Tulare County, California, from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to
Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).
This direct final deletion is being published by EPA with the
concurrence of the State of California, through the Department of Toxic
Substance Control (DTSC), because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been completed. However, this
deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

DATES: This direct final deletion is effective September 25, 2009
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 26, 2009. If adverse
comment(s) are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
Direct Final Deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that
the deletion will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2009-0501 by one of the following methods:

     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow online instructions for
submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Jackie Lane, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S.
EPA Region IX (SFD 6-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California
94105.
     Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand delivery: U.S. EPA Region IX (SFD 6-3), 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105. Deliveries are only accepted
during regular office days and hours of operation (Monday through
Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Special arrangements will need to be made
with EPA staff for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2009-0501 EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means that EPA will not know
your identity or contact information unless it is provided in the body
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA, without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the publicly available
docket on the Internet. EPA recommends that all submittals include your
name and other contact information (i.e., e-mail and/or physical
address and phone number). Please note that electronic file submittals
should be free of any physical defects and computer viruses and avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption. If technical
difficulties prevent EPA from reading your comment and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index; however, some information is not publicly
available (e.g., CBI or other information restricted by disclosure
statute). Certain other materials, such as copyrighted materials, will
be publicly available only in hard copy. All other publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically http://
www.regulations.gov or hard copy at the Site Information repositories
below:

U.S. EPA Superfund Records Center, 95 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105-3901,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Tulare County Public Library, 200 West Oak Street, Visalia, CA 93291,
(818) 952-0603.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charnjit Bhullar, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. EPA Region IX (SFD 7-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

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

I. Introduction

    EPA Region IX is publishing this Direct Final Notice of Deletion of
the Southern California Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site (EPA
ID No. CAD980816466), hereinafter VPY or Site, from the National
Priorities List (NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part
300, which is the Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of
sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health,
welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of
remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund).
As described in 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if conditions at a
deleted site or new information warrant such action.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective September 25, 2009 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by August 26, 2009. Along with this direct
final Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent to
Delete in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register. If
adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period
on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final Notice of Deletion before the effective date of the
deletion, and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will, as
appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue with the
deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to Delete and the
comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to
comment.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL; Section III discusses the procedures that EPA is
using for this action; Section IV discusses how the Southern California
Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site meets the NPL deletion
criteria; and Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from
the NPL.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

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

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures were followed for deletion of this Site:
    (1) The EPA consulted with the State of California's Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) prior to developing this Direct Final
Notice of Deletion and Notice of Intent to Delete being co-published in
the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register.

    (2) EPA provided DTSC 30 working days for its review and comment of
this Notice and the Notice of Intent to Delete and, following its
review, DTSC concurs with the deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this Direct Final Notice
of Deletion, a notice of availability of the parallel Notice of Intent
to Delete is being published in a major local newspaper, the Visalia
Times-Delta. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment
period concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from the NPL.
    (4) The EPA has placed copies of supporting documents for the
proposed site deletion in the Deletion Docket and made these documents
available for public inspection and copying at the Site Information
Repositories identified above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely
notice of withdrawal of this Direct Final Notice of Deletion before its
effective date and it will not take effect; otherwise, EPA will prepare
a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the
basis of the Notice of Intent to Delete and the comments it has already
received.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

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

Site Background and History

    The VPY Site is located at 432 North Ben Maddox Way in northeastern
Visalia, Tulare County, California. The Site is bounded on the north by
East Goshen Avenue, and on the west by North Ben Maddox Way. Visalia is
located approximately midway between Fresno and Bakersfield in the
Central Valley of California and is a growing metropolitan area with a
population of approximately 110,000. Agriculture is the dominant
industry in the region and walnuts, olives, and citrus are the primary
crops.
    The geologic strata underlying the VPY are composed of alluvial-fan
deposits from the Kaweah River and its distributaries. The three
hydrostratigraphic units beneath the site include: A shallow aquifer
(30 to 50 feet bgs; dewatered since the 1980s), a shallow aquitard (50
to 75 feet bgs), an intermediate aquifer (75 to 100 feet bgs), an
intermediate aquitard (100 to 125 feet bgs), and a deep aquifer (125 to
about 180 feet bgs). Both aquitards generally consist of silty sand and
clay materials, whereas the aquifers are composed primarily of fine-
grained and coarse-grained sands. When saturated, the shallow aquitard
restricts vertical groundwater movement. Aquifer testing of the
intermediate hydrostratigraphic unit indicated a transmissivity of
approximately 50,000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft). Short-term
pumping from the deeper aquifer affects hydrostatic water elevation
levels in the intermediate aquifer.
    From 1925 to 1980, the Southern California Edison Company operated
a fabrication yard to produce wooden poles for use in the distribution
of electricity throughout the utility's service territory. Western red
cedar trees were logged and transported to the yard, debarked, sized,
shaped, and chemically preserved to resist attack from fungi and
insects. The chemical preservation treatment process consisted of
immersion of the wooden poles in heated tanks of preservative fluid.
The treatment system consisted of two above-grade dip tanks, one in-
ground full treatment tank, a fluid heating system, hot and cold fluid
storage tanks, and underground product transfer lines. SCE primarily
used creosote to treat its utility poles. However, in 1968, SCE began
using pentachlorophenol (PCP), since PCP treated poles looked
``cleaner'' and were felt to be more suitable for use in an urban
environment. A solution of pentachlorophenol and diesel (petroleum
hydrocarbons) was substituted as the preservative for the wood
preservation process, which contained low levels of dioxin and furan
byproduct impurities of the PCP manufacturing process.
    During the service life of the VPY, significant volumes of chemical
preservatives were released into subsurface soils and groundwater.
Groundwater contamination was first discovered in an on-site well in
1966. Hydrogeologic investigations were conducted between 1966 and 1975
to determine the nature and extent of contamination.
    The types of chemicals found at the VPY include creosote compounds,
PCP, and its associated impurities including octachlorodibenzo-P-
dioxin. The sources of chemical release of creosote and PCP were
primarily leakage from piping between the storage tanks and treatment
tanks and cracks in the treatment tanks.
    In 1989, the VPY was added to the Federal Superfund National
Priorities List (NPL) (54 FR 13296) by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA).
    Cleanup activities were first initiated in 1975, with the
installation of extraction wells to remove contaminated groundwater and
discharge to publicly owned treatment works (POTW). This action was
followed by construction of the slurry wall in 1976-77, to prevent
further downgradient migration of Wood Treating Chemicals (WTCs) in
groundwater. In 1981, all treating facilities were demolished and
approximately 2,300 cubic yards of contaminated soil were removed and
disposed of into an off-site Class 1 disposal facility. Additionally,
an on-site water treatment plant (WTP) consisting of filtration and
adsorption system was built in 1985 and was successful in removing the
chemicals of concern (COC) from the treated groundwater. The WTP was
modified with additional filtration and gravity separation in 1987,
which optimized plant performance by minimizing hazardous waste
generation. The WTP pumped, treated, and discharged an average of 0.36
million gallons per day between 1985 and 1997. In 1997 the construction
and operation of the Visalia Steam Remediation Project (VSRP) began and
the volume of water treated increased to approximately 0.5 million
gallons per day. The treated effluent was now discharged to Mill Creek
under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
    Currently there are no specific redevelopment plans for the Site.
The City of Visalia has purchased all of the surrounding property
formerly owned by SCE and has indicated an interest in purchasing the
subject property (Site) after it is deleted from the NPL. It is
understood the City would expand their current General Services
operations to include the Site.

Remedial Investigation (RI)/Feasibility Study (FS)

    In 1987, SCE and the State signed an agreement requiring the
utility to perform a study to determine the nature and extent of site
contamination and to recommend alternatives for final cleanup action.

    The Remedial Investigation (RI) (Geraghty & Miller, 1992a) found a
distribution of wood treating chemicals (WTCs) in both the vadose zone
and saturated zone at the VPY. Additionally, at that time, a non-
aqueous phase diesel hydrocarbon plume covered a horizontal area
approximately 2.1 acres in size and extended vertically to
approximately 125 feet below ground surface (bgs).
    WTCs in the vadose zone and were found to be concentrated near
points of release from immersion tanks and piping. Horizontal-radial
dispersion of WTCs is believed to have occurred in the shallow vadose
zones by capillary action of fine grained soils and transported
laterally from the source area occurred during times when the vadose
zone was saturated. Historical water table elevation levels were about
30 feet bgs and are currently measured at approximately 80 feet bgs.
Depression of the regional water table elevation level initially
occurred during the state-wide drought of the 1980's, and continues to
decline from increased regional groundwater pumping for residential,
agricultural, and industrial uses.
    The Feasibility Study (FS) (Geraghty & Miller, 1992b) recommended
enhanced in-situ biodegradation (EISB) in addition to continuing the
pump-and-treat system as the recommended remedial action alternative.

Selected Remedy

    The remedial action objectives for the site are:
     Prevent the migration of pole treating chemicals, present
in unsaturated soil, to groundwater;
     Prevent occupational exposure to soil with constituent
concentrations exceeding health-based concentrations;
     Prevent residential and occupational exposure to
groundwater with chemical concentrations above remediation goals; and
     Prevent dermal occupational exposure to groundwater with
chemical concentrations above remediation goals.
    The State approved a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) in 1994 and EPA
signed a Record of Decision (ROD) on June 10, 1994. The major
components of the selected remedy described in the ROD include: In-situ
bioremediation, pilot test of steam remediation, property access
restrictions, and deed restrictions. The goals of the remedy are to
remediate soils to industrial/commercial use levels and to remediate
groundwater to drinking water standards. The contaminants of concern
for both soil and groundwater are Pentachloropenol (PCP),
Benzo(a)Pyrene, and TCDDeqv.

Response Actions

    In 1997, before implementing the remedy, the Visalia Steam
Remediation Project (VSRP), a pilot study approved by DTSC and
concurred by EPA, was initiated which used steam injection technique
called Dynamic Underground Stripping (DUS) to mobilize chemicals of
concern (COCs). The pilot study operated in two phases between May 1997
and June 2000. Phase 1 operations focused on the intermediate aquifer,
with injection and extraction wells screened between 80 and 100 feet
bgs. Phase 2 operations began in November 1998 and included steam
injection and extraction below the intermediate aquitard, with
injection wells screened between 125 and 145 feet bgs. Phase 2
operations continued until the COC removal rate precipitously dropped
in June 2000.
    Following cessation of the VSRP, an enhanced biological degradation
system was installed and operated (SCE, 2001) to augment existing
physical processes that were initiated by DUS and to encourage natural
biological processes to flourish. This system was in operation from
June 2000 until March 2004 and included vadose zone bioventing and
saturated zone biosparging coupled with continued groundwater pump-and-
treat operation. Construction completion of the enhanced biological
degradation system was documented in the 2001 Preliminary Close Out
Report (PCOR).
    A post-remediation surface soil investigation was conducted at the
Site in November 2004. Results for tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
were detected at slightly above Site cleanup standard at four
locations. As a result, and following recommendations of the 2005 Five-
Year Review, contaminated surface soils between zero and ten feet below
grade were removed in July 2006 and remaining soils were verified with
confirmatory sampling to be below ROD cleanup standards.

Cleanup Goals

    The cleanup goals from the ROD are the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Ground water
                                         Soil (mg/kg)       ([mu]g/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petanchlorophenol (PCP)..............           17                   1
Benzo(a)Pyrene.......................            0.39                0.2
TCDDeqv..............................            0.001              30
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The QA/QC program used throughout the design, construction, and
operation of the remediation systems was outlined in a DTSC and EPA
approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). This program enabled
EPA to determine that all analytical results reported were accurate and
adequate and ensure satisfactory execution of the remedial action
requirements consistent with the ROD.
    Duplicate soil and groundwater samples were collected in accordance
with the QAPP. Matrix spike, duplicate, and blank samples were analyzed
by the laboratory, and the resulting data were provided to DTSC and
EPA. The QA/QC program was also used for the quarterly groundwater
monitoring program and cleanup standard attainment demonstration
period.
    During VSRP operations, the various forms of WTC removal or
destruction were documented through continuous monitoring systems and
regular volume measurements. These included:
     Non-aqueous Phase Product recovery
     Vapor-phase removal
     Liquid-phase removal
    Non-aqueous Phase product was recovered from both dissolved air
flotation and oil-water separation methods and transferred to storage
tanks where the volume measurements were made. Vapor-phase recovery was
measured as both total hydrocarbons and CO2 equivalents of
oxidized hydrocarbons via continuous emissions analyzer systems. Liquid
phase removal was measured through a total organic carbon analyzer.
    Quarterly groundwater monitoring was conducted from 1985 through
June 2007 within, and outside the boundaries of the area subjected to
steam remediation operations. Monitoring of extraction wells within and
on the edge of the WTC plume was used as a tool to assess the success
of WTC removal. Monitoring of offsite wells was conducted to ensure
WTCs were not

escaping the groundwater extraction system.
    Groundwater monitoring data from June 2004 through June 2007 were
used to verify that all ROD groundwater cleanup standards had been met.
    The Remedial Action Completion Report (SCE, 2008) documented that
the post-remediation groundwater monitoring and soil removal actions
performed met the ROD cleanup standards for soil and groundwater.
    The Final Close Out Report (FCOR) was signed on May 19, 2009.

Operation and Maintenance

    A ``Covenant to Restrict Use of Property, Environmental
Restriction'', between Southern California Edison and the Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), was recorded in Tulare County,
California on May 23, 2007. This Covenant satisfies the ROD requirement
for property access restrictions and a deed restriction. The Covenant
outlines use restrictions (as well as Site operation and maintenance
(O&M) activities). As remedial action objectives are based on
industrial cleanup standards, prohibited Site uses include: Residences,
human hospitals, schools, and day care centers for children. Prohibited
activities include: Soil disturbance greater than ten feet bgs, and the
installation of water wells for any purpose. The Covenant requires the
Site owner to conduct an annual inspection of the property and prepare
an Annual Inspection Report, describing how all of the site
restrictions are being complied with. The Annual Report must certify
that the property is being used in a manner consistent with the
Covenant, and must be submitted to DTSC by June 15th of each year.

Five-Year Review

    A statutory Five-Year Review was completed in September 2005 (DTSC/
USEPA, 2005), pursuant to EPA's Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance
(OSWER No. 9355.7-03B-P, June 2001). The Five-Year Review concluded
that remedial actions taken at the Site were protective of human health
and the environment in the short term, and institutional controls were
needed in order to ensure long term human health protectiveness. A
``Covenant to Restrict Use of Property, Environmental Restriction'',
between SCE and DTSC, was recorded in Tulare County, California on May
23, 2007.
    The Five-Year Review also recommended an evaluation of contaminated
surface soil; soils which were later removed and any remaining soils
were verified with confirmatory sampling to be below the cleanup
standards prescribed in the ROD. The next Five-Year Review will be
completed by September 2010.

Community Relations Activities

    Community involvement activities included the development of a
Community Relations Plan (CRP), prior to initiation of the RI/FS
activities. The CRP included development of a community profile and a
list of key local contacts. The community profile indicated the
surrounding area was mainly businesses which had little interest in the
site cleanup activities. Notification of the issuance of the Draft ROD
was made and copies of the Draft ROD were made publicly available at
the local public library, DTSC and USEPA Region IX Superfund Records
Center. A Public Notice was also placed in the local newspaper. A
Public Meeting was held in Visalia, California on October 13, 1993, to
provide information on the proposed cleanup. There were no members of
the public in attendance at the meeting. A meeting was also held with
members of the Visalia City Council, to apprise them of the proposed
site cleanup activities. The Council members were supportive of the
proposed cleanup actions and deletion of this site from the NPL.
    Notification to the public of the initiation and completion of the
2005 Five-Year Review was made through a Public Notice in the Visalia
Times-Delta newspaper. A copy of the completed Five-Year Review was
placed in the Tulare County Library, USEPA Region IX Superfund Records
Center.
    Public participation activities for this Site have been satisfied
as required in CERCLA 113(k) and Section 117. All documents and
information which EPA relied on or considered in recommending this
deletion are available for the public to review at the information
repositories identified above.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion From the
NCP

    This site meets all the site completion requirements specified in
OSWER Directive 9320.2-09-A-P, Close Out Procedures for National
Priorities List Sites. Specifically, that the following actions
specified in the ROD have been implemented: (1) SCE applied an
aggressive steam remediation technology to remove COCs in Site soils
and groundwater beneath the site; (2) a post-remediation soil
investigation verified meeting soil cleanup standards prescribed in the
ROD; (3) groundwater has been monitored on a site-wide basis, and the
monitoring results from June 2004 through June 2007 show that cleanup
standards specified in the ROD have been met, and; (4) a Land Use
Covenant between DTSC and SCE has been recorded with Tulare County that
restricts site uses and activities.
    The NCP specifies that EPA may delete a site from the NPL if ``all
appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been implemented,
and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.''
40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the concurrence from the State of
California, DTSC, believes that this criterion for deletion has been
met. Consequently, EPA is deleting this Site from the NPL. Documents
supporting this action are available in the Site repositories.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of California, DTSC, has
determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other
than operation, maintenance, monitoring and five-year reviews have been
completed. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication. This action will
be effective September 25, 2009 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
August 26, 2009. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of deletion before its effective date of deletion,
and it will not take effect; otherwise, EPA will prepare a response to
comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the
notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There
will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

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

    Dated: July 15, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as
follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.
193.

Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing ``Southern
California Edison Co. (Visalia) Visalia, CA.''

[FR Doc. E9-17562 Filed 7-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 110 (Monday, June 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32932-32933]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13274]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: EC14-95-000.
    Applicants: Broken Bow Wind II, LLC.
    Description: Broken Bow Wind II, LLC Section 203 Application and
Request for Expedited Action.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5253.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1159-001.
    Applicants: National Grid Generation LLC.
    Description: Annual Reset of Pension and OPEB Expenses Ending 12/
31/13 to be effective 1/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5314.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-2336-002.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Portland General Electric Company submits tariff
filing per 35: Compliance Filing Order 764 to be effective 11/12/2013.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5326.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2062-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: SPP-MISO JOA Emergency Energy Assistance Revisions to
Section 3.3 to be effective 3/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/29/14.
    Accession Number: 20140529-5260.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2063-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2014-05-29--IPE--Topics1-2 to be effective 8/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/29/14.

    Accession Number: 20140529-5267.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/19/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2064-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: Northeast Utilities Service Company to be effective 7/
30/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5031.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2065-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: 2889 ITC Great Plains and Mid-Kansas Electric Co.
Novation to be effective 7/29/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5085.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2066-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Annual Update Filing of GFA to be effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2069-000.
    Applicants: CED White River Solar 2, L.L.C.
    Description: Filing of Certificate of Concurrence to be effective
5/30/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5214.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2070-000.
    Applicants: Plains and Eastern Clean Line LLC, Plains and Eastern
Clean Line Oklahoma LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization to Sell Transmission
Service Rights at Negotiated Rates, Request for Approval of Capacity
Allocation Process, Request for Waivers, and Request for Expedited
Action of Plains and Eastern Clean Line LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5221.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2071-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: SA 717--Construction Agreement with Idaho Power
Company to be effective 5/31/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5220.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2072-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: 2014-05-30--Index of Customers Filing to be effective
7/30/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2073-000.
    Applicants: Panda-Brandywine, L.P.
    Description: Market-Based Rate Tariff to be effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5229.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2074-000.
    Applicants: Broken Bow Wind II, LLC.
    Description: Broken Bow Wind II, LLC, Common Facilities Agreement
to be effective 7/28/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5262.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2075-000.
    Applicants: Eagle Point Power Generation LLC.
    Description: Request for Waiver of Eagle Point Power Generation LLC
under New Docket.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14
    Accession Number: 20140530-5278.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2076-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Western IA May 2014 Biannual Filing to be effective 8/
1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5290.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2078-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: First Revised Service Agreement No. 3202; Queue No.
W3-077 to be effective 4/30/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5307.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2079-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Western WDT May 2014 Biannual Filing to be effective
8/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5317.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2080-000.
    Applicants: Louisiana Generating LLC.
    Description: Louisiana Generating LLC submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Proposed Rate Schedule FERC No. 11 to be effective 8/
1/2014.
    Filed Date: 5/30/14.
    Accession Number: 20140530-5329.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/20/14.

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

    Dated: May 30, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-13274 Filed 6-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 46462-46464]
[DOCID:fr20au07-59]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Doc EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0558, FRL-8456-9]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Recordkeeping Requirements for Producers of Pesticides
Under Section 8 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA), EPA ICR Number 0143.10, OMB Control Number

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a
continuing Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on December 31,
2007. 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 must be submitted on or before October 19, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OECA-2007-0558 by one of the following methods:
    1. Electronic Submission: Access http://www.regulations.gov and

follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center
(ECDIC), Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Mail Code: 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    5. Hand Delivery: Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information
Center (ECDIC), Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket Center's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-
OECA-2007-0558. It is EPA's policy that all

comments received will be included in the public docket without change
and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov
 Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your

e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Nogle, tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
(202) 564-0085; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
number OECA-2007-0558. This docket is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and

Compliance Docket and Information Center (ECDIC), in the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and
Information Center (ECDIC) 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. When
in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified in this document.

What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to:
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burdens
of the proposed collections of information.
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    (4) Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
or electronic collection technologies or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

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

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing
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.
    Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
those which produce pesticides.
    Title: Recordkeeping Requirements for Producers of Pesticides under
Section 8 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) as amended. ICR Number 0143.10, OMB Control Number 2070-0028.
Expires 12/31/07.
    Abstract: Section 8 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) states that the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency may prescribe regulations requiring
producers, registrants and applicants for registration to maintain such
records with respect to their operations and the effective enforcement
of this Act as the Administrator determines are necessary for the
effective enforcement of FIFRA and to make such records available for
inspection and copying as specified in the statute. The regulations at
40 CFR part 169 (Books and Records of Pesticide Production and
Distribution) specify the following records that producers must keep
and the disposition of those records: Production data for pesticides,
devices, or active ingredients (including pesticides produced pursuant
to an experimental use permit); receipt by the producer of pesticides,
devices, or active ingredients used in producing pesticides; delivery,
moving, or holding of pesticides; inventory; domestic advertising for
restricted use pesticides; guarantees; exports; disposal; human
testing; and tolerance petitions. Additionally, section 8 gives the
Agency inspectional authority to monitor the validity of research data
(including raw data), including data developed in accordance with Good
Laboratory Practice Standards, and used to support pesticide
registration. The EPA or States/Indian Tribes operating under
Cooperative Enforcement Agreements make use of the records required by
section 8 through periodically inspecting them to help determine FIFRA
compliance of this subject to the provisions of the Act. In addition,
producers themselves make use of such records in order to comply with
reporting requirements under FIFRA section 7 and 40 CFR 167.85. (Those
reporting requirements are addressed in the ICR entitled ``Pesticide
Report for Pesticide-Producing Establishments.'')
    Since most of the records required to be maintained are likely to
be collected and maintained in the course of good business practice,
the records are generally stored on site at either the establishment
producing the pesticide or at the place of business of the person
holding the registration. However, the registrant may decide to
transfer records relating to disposal of pesticides and human testing
to EPA for storage because of a twenty year retention

requirement for the records. 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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Burden: The average annual burden to the industry over the next
three years is estimated to be 2 person hours per response.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: 13,400.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 13,400.
    Frequency of Response: 1.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 26,800.
    There are no capital/startup costs or operating and maintenance
(O&M) costs associated with this ICR since all equipment associated
with this ICR is present as part of ordinary business practices.
    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.
    EPA will consider any comments received and may amend the ICR, as
appropriate. Then the final ICR packages will be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue one or more Federal Register notices pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR(s) to OMB and
the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any
questions about any of the above ICRs or the approval process, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Dated: August 10, 2007.
Richard Colbert,
Director, Agriculture Division, Office of Compliance, Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
 [FR Doc. E7-16319 Filed 8-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 34 (Monday, February 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8654-8656]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03498]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0848; FRL-9942-56-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Revision to the Milwaukee-Racine-
Waukesha 2006 24-Hour Particulate Matter Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
Wisconsin's December 23, 2015, state implementation plan (SIP) revision
to the Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha (Milwaukee), Wisconsin 2006 24-Hour
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) maintenance plan. This SIP
revision establishes new Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) for the years 2020 and 2025. The MVEBs
for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), and PM2.5 will remain the same. EPA is
approving the allocation of a portion of the safety margin for VOC in
the PM2.5 maintenance plan to the 2020 and 2025 MVEBs. The
2020 and 2025 total year emissions of VOC for the area will remain
below the attainment level required by the transportation conformity
regulations.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective April 22, 2016, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by March 23, 2016. If adverse comments
are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final
rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0848 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received on its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Leslie, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is a ``safety margin''?
III. How does this action change the Milwaukee area's 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 maintenance plan?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background for this action?

    On April 22, 2014 (79 FR 22415), EPA approved a request from the
State of Wisconsin to redesignate the Milwaukee area for the 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). In
addition to approving the PM2.5 redesignation request, EPA
approved the State's plan for maintaining the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS in Milwaukee through 2025. The PM2.5
maintenance plan established MVEBs for PM2.5,
SO2, VOC and NOX for 2020 and 2025 to account for
new transportation planning assumptions.
    MVEBs are the projected levels of controlled emissions from the
transportation sector (mobile sources) that are estimated in the SIP to
provide for maintenance of the ozone standard. The transportation
conformity rule allows the MVEB to be changed as long as the total
level of emissions from all sources remains below the attainment
levels.

II. What is a ``safety margin''?

    A ``safety margin'', as defined in the transportation conformity
rule (40 CFR part 93 subpart A), is the amount by which the total
projected emissions from all sources of a given pollutant are less than
the total emissions that would satisfy the applicable requirement for
reasonable further progress, attainment, or maintenance. The attainment
level of emissions is the level of emissions during the year in which
the area met the NAAQS. Table 1 gives detailed information on the
safety margin for the VOC portion of the Milwaukee's 2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 maintenance plan. Table 1 includes a comparison of the
VOC emissions in the 2010 (Wisconsin's attainment year), to the
projected emissions of VOC in 2020 and 2025. The difference between the
projected emissions in years 2020 and 2025 and the actual emissions in
2010 is referred to as the safety margin or the amount of excess
emission reductions.

                 Table 1--VOC Safety Margin for Milwaukee's 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Maintenance Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Projected
                                                                    Attainment      maintenance    Safety margin
                              Year                                year emissions     emissions      (tons/day)
                                                                    (tons/day)      (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010............................................................          127.40  ..............  ..............
2020............................................................  ..............          105.81           21.59
2025............................................................  ..............          106.70           20.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wisconsin has requested the VOC allocation of 2.384 tons/day for 2020
and 1.798 tons/day for 2025 from the safety margins to the MVEBs. The
revised maintenance plan will have VOC safety margins of 19.21 tons/day
for 2020 and 18.90 tons/day for 2025. The 2020 and 2025 projected VOC
emissions, even with this allocation, will be below the 2010 attainment
year emissions. For this reason, EPA finds that the allocation of the
safety margin to the 2020 and 2025 VOC MVEBs for Milwaukee's 2006 24-
Hour PM2.5 maintenance plan meets the requirements of the
transportation conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 93, and is
approvable.

III. How does this action change the Milwaukee area's 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 maintenance plan?

    This action changes the VOC MVEBs for mobile sources. The
maintenance plan is designed to provide for future growth while still
maintaining the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Growth in
industries, population, and traffic is offset by reductions from
cleaner cars and other emission reduction programs. Through the
maintenance plan, the state and local agencies can manage and maintain
clean air quality while providing for growth.
    In the submittal, Wisconsin requested to allocate a portion of the
safely margins for VOC to the 2020 and 2025 MVEBs. Table 2 details the
updated MVEBs for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 maintenance plan
for the Milwaukee area. Table 2 shows the 2020 and 2025 VOC MVEBs
(approved by EPA on April 22, 2014), the amount of excess emission
reductions or safety margin to be allocated into the new MVEBs, and the
new 2020 and 2025 MVEBs for VOC.

                          Table 2--Milwaukee 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Maintenance Plan MVEBs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Safety margin
                              Year                                Approved MVEBs    allocation       New MVEBs
                                                                    (tons/day)      (tons/day)      (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................................................          15.890           2.384          18.274
2025............................................................          11.980           1.798          13.778
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving a revision to the Milwaukee 2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 maintenance plan. The revision will change the VOC
MVEBs for 2020 and 2025 that are used for transportation conformity
purposes. The revision will keep the total emissions for the area at or
below the attainment level required by law. This action will allow the
state or local agencies to continue to maintain air quality while
providing for transportation growth.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective April 22, 2016
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by March 23, 2016. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective April
22, 2016.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator is required to
approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 22, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 5, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 52.2584 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2584  Control strategy; Particulate matter.

* * * * *
    (f) Approval--On December 23, 2015, the State of Wisconsin
submitted a revision to its State Implementation Plan for the
Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha (Milwaukee), Wisconsin 2006 24-Hour
Particulate Matter Maintenance Plan. The submittal established new
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEB) for Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC) for the years 2020 and 2025. The VOC MVEBs for the Milwaukee area
are now: 18.274 tons per day for 2020 and 13.778 tons per day for the
year 2025.

[FR Doc. 2016-03498 Filed 2-19-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 134 (Thursday, July 12, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32215-32218]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14804]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0634; Product Identifier 2018-NM-050-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700,
701 & 702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705)
airplanes, Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, and
Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by reports of a fractured main landing gear (MLG)
orifice support tube (OST). This proposed AD would require replacing
the MLG OST, and revising the maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive maintenance
requirements and airworthiness limitations. We are proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 27, 2018.

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 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5

p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-
free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
514-855-7401; email [email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information 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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0634; 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, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite 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-2018-0634;
Product Identifier 2018-NM-050-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM 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 NPRM.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2018-02, dated January
16, 2018 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet
Series 700, 701 & 702) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet
Series 705) airplanes, Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900)
airplanes, and Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes.
The MCAI states:

    Five cases of fractured Main Landing Gear (MLG) Orifice Support
Tube (OST) have been reported. Subsequent analysis determined that
the MLG OST is unable to withstand the loads generated during a hard
landing event. A MLG OST fracture cannot be detected during routine
maintenance and if not corrected, a fractured MLG OST can lead to
aeroplane structural damage and/or collapse of the MLG.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the replacement of the existing MLG
OSTs with a re-designed part, and the implementation of a new
airworthiness limitation task.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0634.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin SB 670BA-32-058, dated
September 26, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
replacing each MLG OST.
    Bombardier has also issued Temporary Revision ALI-0593, dated
December 18, 2017. The service information describes new life limits
for the MLG OSTs.
    These service information are 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

    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, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.
    This AD requires revisions to certain operator maintenance
documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections). Compliance with
these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have
been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed
by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able to accomplish the
actions 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 according to paragraph (i) of this proposed AD.
The request should include a description of changes to the required
actions that will ensure the continued damage tolerance of the affected
structure.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require replacing the MLG OST and revising
the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and airworthiness
limitations.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 542 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement (left- and right-hand       24 work-hours x $85 per             * $0          $2,040      $1,105,680
 sides).                                 hour = $2,040.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the parts cost in this
  AD.

    We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we
recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the
past, we have estimated

that this action takes 1 work-hour per airplane. Since operators
incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their
affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-operator estimate is
more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, we estimate the
total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).

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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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):

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2018-0634; Product Identifier 2018-
NM-050-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by August 27, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Bombardier, Inc., airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in
any category.
    (1) Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702)
airplanes, serial numbers 10003 through 10345 inclusive.
    (2) Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes and
Model CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial
numbers 15001 through 15429 inclusive.
    (3) Model CL-600-2E25 (Regional Jet Series 1000) airplanes,
serial numbers 19001 through 19052 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Main landing
gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of a fractured main landing gear
(MLG) orifice support tube (OST). We are issuing this AD to address
a fractured MLG OST, which can lead to structural damage to the
airplane and collapse of the MLG.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Replacement

    Within the compliance times specified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g) of this AD: Replace each MLG OST, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin SB 670BA-
32-058, dated September 26, 2016.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP12JY18.018

(h) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
Bombardier Temporary Revision ALI-0593, dated December 18, 2017. The
initial compliance time for accomplishing the actions is at the
applicable time specified in Bombardier Temporary Revision ALI-0593,
dated December 18, 2017; or within 90 days after the effective date
of this AD; whichever occurs later.

(i) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

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

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO 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 manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2018-02, dated January 16, 2018, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0634.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Section, FAA,
New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center
North America toll-free telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or direct-dial
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected]; internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may view this service information 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on July 3, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-14804 Filed 7-11-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 144 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 43820]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18266]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: CP08-404-000.
    Applicants: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C.
    Description: MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C. submits its Cost and Revenue
Study.
    Filed Date: 7/13/12.
    Accession Number: 20120713-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/31/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-872-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: 2012-07-18 NC Mieco, CIMA to be effective 7/19/2012.
    Filed Date: 7/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120718-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-873-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: 2012-07-17 NC K's Cima, Mieco, Concord to be effective
7/18/2012.
    Filed Date: 7/17/12.
    Accession Number: 20120717-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/12.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP01-382-022.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits for filing its
annual report setting forth the Carlton Resolution buyout, surcharge
and penalty dollars reimbursed to the Carlton Sourcers on their May
reservation invoices for the 2011-2012 heating season.
    Filed Date: 6/1/12.
    Accession Number: 20120601-5144.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-828-001.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Amendment to Filing to be effective 7/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 7/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120718-5016.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 7/30/12.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service can be found at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: July 19, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.
Deputy Secretary
[FR Doc. 2012-18266 Filed 7-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 186 (Monday, September 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59481-59482]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24641]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a
meeting of the Federal Aviation Administration Air Traffic Procedures
Advisory Committee (ATPAC) will be held to review present air traffic
control procedures and practices for standardization, revision,
clarification, and upgrading of terminology and procedures.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, October 4, and Wednesday,
October 5, 2011 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at ATCA Conference, Gaylord,
National Harbor, 201 Waterfront Street, National Harbor, MD 20745.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gary Norek, ATPAC Executive
Director, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. Telephone
(202) 267-9205.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. App.2), notice is
hereby given of a meeting of the ATPAC to be held Tuesday, October 4,
and Wednesday, October 5, 2011 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    The agenda for this meeting will cover a continuation of the
ATPAC's review of present air traffic control procedures and practices
for standardization, revision, clarification, and upgrading of
terminology and procedures. It will also include:
    1. Approval of Minutes;
    2. Submission and Discussion of Areas of Concern;
    3. Discussion of Potential Safety Items;
    4. Report from Executive Director;
    5. Items of Interest; and
    6. Discussion and agreement of location and dates for subsequent
meetings.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
available. With the approval of the Chairperson,

members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting.
Persons desiring to attend and persons desiring to present oral
statement should notify Mr. Gary Norek no later than October 2, 2011.
Any member of the public may present a written statement to the ATPAC
at any time at the address given above.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 19, 2011.
Gary A. Norek,
Executive Director, Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2011-24641 Filed 9-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 19799]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09178]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4401-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Virginia; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for Commonwealth of Virginia (FEMA-4401-DR), dated October 15, 2018,
and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on April 4, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Dolph A.
Diemont, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Donald L. Keldsen as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-09178 Filed 5-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 222 (Friday, November 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69353-69354]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25089]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-96307; File No. SR-CboeBYX-2022-026]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Its Fee Schedule

November 14, 2022.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on November 1, 2022, Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or BYX) proposes to amend
its Fee Schedule. The text of the proposed rule change is provided in
Exhibit 5.
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/equities/regulation/rule_filings/byx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its Fee Schedule to clarify that fee
code X \3\ is applicable to certain routed orders that add or remove
liquidity. The Exchange proposes to implement these changes effective
November 1, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Fee code X is appended to routed orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to clarify that fee code X is applicable to
routed orders that add or remove liquidity. When certain fee codes were
deleted from the Fee Schedule, the Exchange simultaneously proposed to
update fee code X to make clear that it applies to all other routed
orders that are not otherwise specified under other fee codes in the
Fee Schedule.\4\ However, the Exchange did not make clear in the fee
code table that fee code X is therefore also applicable to orders that
both add and remove liquidity.\5\ Therefore, the Exchange is now
proposing to add such language to the description of fee code X,
eliminate the reference to ``Removing'' liquidity in the Standard Rates
header for the Routing Liquidity column (which is applicable to fee
code X), and make corresponding updates to footnote 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act No. 90999 (January 27, 2021) 86
FR 7914 (February 2, 2021) (SR-CboeBYX-2021-003).
    \5\ Under the Transaction Fees section of the Fee Schedule,
bullet four provides ``[u]nless otherwise noted, all routing fees or
rebates in the Fee Codes and Associated Fees table are for removing
liquidity from the destination venue.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(4),\7\ in particular, as it is designed to provide for the
equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among
its Members, issuers and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes the proposal to modify fee code X to
explicitly provide that it is applicable to routed orders that add and
remove liquidity on the destination exchange is not designed to permit
unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
Specifically, the proposal is intended only to make a clarifying change
to the Fee Schedule and involves no substantive change.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes its
proposal to clarify that fee code X is applicable to liquidity adding
and removing orders will have no impact on competition as it involves
no substantive change, but merely is a clarifying change to the
existing Fee Schedule.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4 \9\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may

temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeBYX-2022-026 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2022-026. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CboeBYX-2022-026 and should be submitted
on or before December 9, 2022.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherry R. Haywood,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25089 Filed 11-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P