Date:		September 21, 2016
To:		Oil and Gas ICR Project File
Subject:	Summary of Comments and Responses
		Oil and Gas Information Collection Request
		Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-0204

Background
      On June 3, 2016 (81 FR 35763), EPA solicited comment on the first draft Information Collection Request (ICR) for the oil and natural gas industry, and we received 66 comment letters during the comment period. We reviewed and considered each of these comments and, as a result, revised the ICR as noted below. This document addresses some of the general comments and concerns, regardless of whether they have been incorporated into the revised ICR. The comments not specifically addressed in this document included more detailed remarks on particular sections of the ICR. A table identifying these comments and how they were addressed is included as an Attachment to this memorandum. A redline version of the ICR supporting statement showing changes made from the proposed ICR (including Attachments showing redline changes to specific questions) has been placed in the docket (see Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0204). Any changes made to the ICR as a result of these comments are also reflected in the revised version of the ICR spreadsheet questionnaires.
Definition of Facility
      Some commenters mentioned that using the source determination rule as a way to define a facility does not make sense across the industry for existing sources, particularly the production segment.  The draft ICR referenced the source determination rule's clarification of the term "adjacent" to determine the scope of a "facility."  However, commenters stated that there are non-contiguous areas that are adjacent, and flow into the same centralized tank battery but do not all reside within a quarter of a mile of each other. Commenters pointed out that the first draft of the ICR would not require the owners or operators to include information on the centralized production area that would include centralized tank batteries and other processing equipment such as separators, acid gas removal units (AGRUs), and glycol dehydrators under the original approach, unless these operations were within a quarter mile of a well site.  Similarly for Part 2, some commenters indicated that owners or operators of facilities that have large numbers of operations within a quarter mile of each other would likely incur a large burden of responding to Part 2 if they were required to include all these operations in the detailed survey.
      In order to address these concerns, we revised Part 1 to request limited information on all centralized production surface sites as well as all well surface sites.  For Part 2, we request detailed information on the individual well sites that contain the randomly chosen wells, as well as detailed information on the centralized production surface sites that the selected well site feeds.
Statistical Sampling Approach
      We received many comments suggesting changes to our statistical sampling approach for Part 2 respondents and we have modified our strategy as a result. In the first FR notice, we proposed two options for stratifying the production segment for Part 2 sampling: by geographical region and by gas-to-oil ratio (GOR). Many commenters suggested that the GOR approach for stratifying the production segment was the more preferable method. Several commenters also suggested adding a new category for stripper wells with low production, which are defined as  wells that produce 15 barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) or less per day on average over a 12-month period.  We decided to use the GOR approach for stratifying the production segment; however, we have also included another set of categories for stripper wells, stratifying both the  non-stripper well and the stripper well populations by GOR using the proposed GOR groupings. For the stripper well populations, we doubled the acceptable error so that the sampling size for the stripper populations is about 96 wells. Having separate categories for non-stripper wells with the GOR groups will help us collect better information on higher-producing wells and cost-effective emissions control opportunities. More information on this approach is detailed in the supporting statement.
Publish Facility Lists
      In the first draft of the ICR, we assumed that response rates would be approximately 75 percent due to inaccurate contact information and facility closures. One way to increase this response rate is to have better facility contact information.  Several commenters suggested that we publish our entire list of facilities and have individual companies adjust their addresses as appropriate. We agree that this approach should provide us with better information and have therefore changed our response rate assumption to 90%.  Facility lists are now available at: https://oilandgasicr.rti.org/ where owners and operators may adjust and correct their appropriate address information prior to the mail out of the survey forms.
Gathering and Boosting Facilities
      In the first draft of the ICR, we recognized that facility information on gathering and boosting facilities was incomplete. Commenters provided several suggestions for acquiring necessary gathering and boosting facility information. One approach was to wait until 2017, when EPA will receive a more complete list of gathering and boosting stations from the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), since these facilities will be reporting for the first time for the 2016 calendar year. Another approach was for EPA to publish a Federal Register notice that all gathering compressor stations must complete Part 1 of the ICR. After EPA receives the list, commenters suggest that EPA would then randomly select facilities on the list to receive a Part 2 questionnaire.
      Another suggestion by commenters would be for EPA to require natural gas processing plants at the highest level parent company to select a certain percentage of its gathering compressor facilities using a random number generator imbedded in an EPA-provided spreadsheet. Parent companies of natural gas processing plants are likely to own most gathering facilities, so that the majority of gathering and boosting facilities should be captured. In addition, commenters suggested that EPA should require natural gas well production facilities to randomly select gathering facilities that they may also own. Because of our need to acquire information in a timely manner, we have decided to follow the third approach suggested by commenters to require highest level parent companies of production and natural gas processing facilities to randomly select a percentage of gathering and boosting facilities to respond to Part 2.
Extend Deadline to Complete Part 1 and Part 2
      Many commenters requested more time to respond to both Part 1 and Part 2. The original time to complete Part 1 and Part 2 were 30 days and 120 days, respectively. Several commenters requested 60 days for Part 1 and from 180 days to 240 days for Part 2. Reasons to extend the Part 1 response period included the need for more time  to access data spanning across several databases and hard copies for responders of many facilities.  Numerous commenters also indicated that some elements that may have appeared to not be burdensome on the surface such as providing distances from facilities to field offices and providing information on availability of electricity would require GPS mapping and detailed records searches, which would take a lot more time and effort than EPA accounted for. Reasons to extend the Part 2 response period included: time needed to conduct field data collection and sampling and analysis, especially time to familiarize industry and laboratories with the CARB sampling and analysis methodologies; the possibility of inclement weather and delays in conducting field work; avoiding overlap with GHGRP and permit compliance reports, which are heavily weighted in the first quart of 2017; avoiding winter heating season where personnel are already stretched thin with holiday seasons and personal vacations; and time needed to hire contractors to complete the ICR.
      For Part 2, while we acknowledge commenters' concerns with completing the ICR within the required timeframe, we are still keeping the response deadline to 120 days from receipt of the ICR.  As discussed earlier, we expect that limiting the scope of Part 2  by revising the definition of "facility" to a "well site facility" will reduce the burden for some operators. For Part 1, we note that we have eliminated reporting of some elements, such as electricity, distances, and the occurrence of manned facilities that commenters indicated would require significantly greater burden than expected. Because we are simplifying Part 1, we see no reason why commenters could not meet the original 30 day response deadline. Therefore, we are also not extending the timeframe for responses to either Part 1 or Part 2 at this time.
Moving Data Elements from Part 1 to Part 2
      Multiple commenters mentioned there would be added burden in collecting information on manned facilities, electrification, and access to gas infrastructure. In order to decrease this burden, we have determined that it would be best to move these data elements into Part 2. Part 2 will be collected completely by the e-GGRT system which is capable of storing and managing confidential business information. Further, some commenters requested that we ask more detailed questions about manned facilities, electrification, and access to gas infrastructure, indicating that more information is necessary to understand these issues.  We eliminated these questions from Part 1 and added  more detailed and  directed questions for these elements in Part 2.
CARB Method
      Many commenters requested that EPA provide flexibility in sampling requirements for separators to determine potential flash emissions from atmospheric tanks. Flashing emissions occur when pressurized liquids (crude oil, condensate, and produced water) are routed into atmospheric storage tanks. To assess flashing emissions, we are requesting that selected facilities in Part 2 use the California Air Resources Board (CARB) method for sampling and analyzing pressurized liquids from any separators prior to atmospheric storage tanks. Comments on the CARB method include: the current amendment to the CARB method is still in the draft stage and has not had adequate peer review; it has been applied primarily for produced heavy oil sampled at low pressure separators; only four laboratories are familiar with the CARB method; some laboratories have mentioned that the method will not be appropriate for areas in the Uintah and the Denver-Julesburg Basin; and finally, the high cost of the CARB method.
      While we understand the issues that have been raised, we intend to require a consistent set of procedures for sampling and analysis. The CARB method simply clarifies an existing industry sampling protocol (GPA method 2174) for the purposes of sampling pressurized liquids from separators, and the CARB method utilizes existing industry methods for analysis. One commenter requested simply using GPA method 2174, as opposed to the CARB method. GPA method 2174, however, does not specify a volumetric flow rate requirement into the sampling containers.  We believe it is important to limit the sampling rate because samples taken at a lower rate are likely to yield more reliable results than those taken at faster rates because of the minimized risk of flashing within the canister. Consequently, we are requesting that selected facilities use the latest version of the CARB method, but use the volumetric flowrate from the December 2010 version that requires a 60 mL/min sampling rate as opposed to later versions that require a 120  -  180 mL/min rate. In addition to concerns about the sampling rate, some commenters stated that the CARB method would not be appropriate for the Denver-Julesburg basin nor for non-heavy oil wells.. However, preliminary information suggests that  the CARB method can and does produce reliable results for a range of GORs. While a higher GOR may make extracting the sample more difficult, this method, with volumetric sampling rate limitations and clear instructions, should provide a consistent sampling approach.
      Several commenters also requested that the overall burden for pressurized liquid sampling be reduced, particularly for downstream segments. The commenters suggested that the natural gas composition in transmission pipelines is uniform and that only one representative sample should be required for any company. They also noted that separators in this industry segment do not have significant liquids accumulation and do not typically have ports for liquids sampling. In response to these comments, we have added a provision that if the separator's liquid output (oil, condensate, and water) is less than 10 bbl/day, then sampling is not required. However, we are concerned that this may effectively exempt all separators in the transmission compression industry segment. Therefore, we are requiring parent companies of selected transmission compression facilities that do not have any separators with liquid output exceeding 10 bbl/day to select any separator at a selected facility to perform a single flash gas analysis using the CARB method. We expect that allowing parent companies the opportunity to select the separator to sample will eliminate the need to install sampling ports for separators that do not have them.
      Some commenters asked if separators are in series, which separator should be sampled via the CARB method. Our intent is that, for separators in series, only the separator that feeds into an atmospheric storage tank should be sampled.   We have clarified this question in the instructions to the Part 2 survey.
GHGRP Duplication
      Many commenters stated that there are many data fields within the ICR that will also be reported to the EPA during the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). We agree that reporting the same information on the ICR and the GHGRP would be duplicative. On Part 2 of the ICR, we ask for the company's GHGRP ID number. If this information is provided, the spreadsheet blacks out the cells containing information that is identical to the data elements already reported in the GHGRP.
Additional HAP Data
      Some commenters mentioned that the focus of the ICR was skewed towards only collecting data on methane emissions, and these commenters requested that more information be collected on HAPs.  While we acknowledge that the primary goal of this ICR is to collect data on emissions of greenhouse gases, information that EPA plans to collect will also support the Agency's ongoing efforts to evaluate hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from the oil and gas industry. EPA is currently in the process of evaluating issues raised in several petitions seeking administrative reconsideration of the 2012 revisions to the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), 40 CFR Part 63, Subparts HH and HHH. The ICR includes the collection of information that would be relevant to this effort.
Storage wells and Injection Wells
      One commenter indicated that EPA only asked for information on gas wells, and therefore it was unclear on how operators of storage wells would report information. We agree with this commenter and have added a tab for storage and injection wells. We also request information on injection wells. For storage wells, we included questions regarding the storage formation type, the total and working gas capacity, and the deliverability and injection capacity. For injection wells, we included questions regarding the type of injection well, the formation type and capacity, and the maximum injection rate.
Well Economics
      One commenter suggested that we ask for operational costs associated with marginal wells so that we can understand the impact of potential control requirements. In response, we have added questions to the ICR that will help us better understand the economics of oil and natural gas wells.
Confidential Business Information
      Several commenters asserted that the information sought by the surveys that accompanied the first draft of the ICR could potentially be confidential business information (CBI), and that CBI ought to be protected from public disclosure by EPA. To support the position that some of the data elements in the surveys should be withheld from public disclosure, comments alleged that making these data elements available to the public could have an unfair impact on competition, compromise trade secrets, breach contracts, implicate national security, and/or violate the law (such as CIPSEA). Some commenters asserted that certain data elements in the surveys were not "emissions data" and thus cannot be excluded from confidentiality protection under section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act.  These comments were submitted in response to the discussions related to the treatment of confidential information in the Federal Register Notice (81 FR 35763), the Support Statement for Public Comment, and a memo included in the docket titled "Data Category Assignments and Draft Confidentiality Determinations for Data Elements in the Draft Information Collection Effort for Oil and Gas Facilities" (CBI Memo).
      EPA is taking this opportunity to clarify that no confidentiality determination is being made via the ICR process. The charts that were included in the CBI Memo were intended for informative purposes only and were meant to assist with the solicitation of comments from possible industry respondents. EPA appreciates the comments and emphasizes that all information submitted to the Agency in response to the ICR surveys will be managed in accordance with applicable laws and EPA's regulations governing treatment of confidential business information at 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B. Any information determined to constitute a trade secret will be protected under 18 U.S.C. § 1905.
Legal Authority
      Several commenters proclaim that the stated purpose of the ICR, to gather information to support future regulatory actions, does not comport with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and therefore cannot justify the ICR under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Put another way, commenters allege that EPA does not have the legal authority to utilize the information that the Agency plans to collect via the ICR to regulate the oil and gas industry. To support this argument, commenters state that EPA cannot promulgate regulations in accordance with CAA § 111(d) for the oil and gas industry because this industry is already regulated by various entities, including by states and the EPA, under different statutory authorities, including CAA § 112. Moreover, some commenters argue that EPA must make an additional endangerment finding, must promulgate additional CAA § 111(b) standards, and/or revise the source category listing before promulgating a 111(d) standard.
      EPA disagrees with these comments. The Agency does have the authority to utilize the data that it plans to collect via the ICR for numerous purposes, including, but not necessarily limited to, exercising EPA's authority under CAA § 111(d). EPA does not agree that it lacks the legal authority to regulate the oil and gas industry for greenhouse gases pursuant to 111(d) due to the fact that that same industry is subject to regulations for hazardous air pollutants under CAA § 112. Commenters have not cited any compelling authority to substantiate their claims that EPA lacks the legal authority to effectuate the purpose of the ICR.
      CAA § 114 grants the EPA authority to collect the information sought via the ICR. Per the CAA, the Agency has legal authority to collect this information from the oil and gas industry. Moreover, the purpose of the ICR serves a goal that is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act. EPA acknowledges that some issues raised by commenters, including the interaction of CAA sections 112 and 111(d), are contemplated in active litigation. EPA has stated its view on these issues in its filings in West Virginia v. EPA, No. 15-1363 (and consolidated cases) (D.C. Cir.) and in the Clean Power Plan final rule (at 80 FR 64662, 64710-64715 (Oct. 23, 2015)). As such, EPA does not find it necessary to restate the Agency's arguments here.
      To be clear, the data collected via the ICR will only be utilized in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and agency guidance. This data has utility, is not duplicative with currently available information, and has value that outweighs the ICR's burden. The analysis required by the Paperwork Reduction Act is included in the docket for the second draft of the ICR, as it was for the first draft. Please see the Support Statement and other docket materials for further discussion on this matter.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65183-65185]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24952]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0624; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-071-AD;
Amendment 39-17632; AD 2013-21-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; ATR--GIE Avions de Transport
R[eacute]gional Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Model ATR72-101, -201, -
102, -202, -211, -212, and -212A airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of airplane incidents and accidents that have occurred because
of low-level fuel tank situations and fuel starvation that resulted in
engine flameouts. This AD requires installing a fuel quantity indicator
(FQI) equipped with a locking adaptor on the electrical connector. We
are issuing this AD to prevent an engine flame-out, which could result
in reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 5, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 5,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0624 or in person at the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact ATR--GIE
Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional, 1, All[eacute]e Pierre Nadot,
31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax +33
(0) 5 62 21 67 18; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.aerochain.com. You may review this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to the specified products. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on July 18, 2013 (78 FR 42898).
The NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0047, dated March 4, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:

    Large aeroplane incidents and accidents have occurred because of
fuel tank low level situations, or because of fuel starvation,
resulting in one or several engine(s) flame-out. The results of the
investigation into an ATR 72 accident in August 2005 have shown that
overruling standard operational procedures and maintenance practices
have led to this kind of occurrence.
    Consequently, additional actions to help avoid maintenance
errors, like installation of a wrong gauge or wrong indicator, need
to be taken.
    Although it is recognised that the fuel (indicating) system of
the ATR 42/72 type design is compliant with the applicable
requirements, the risk of other maintenance errors will be mitigated
by making installation of an ATR 42 Fuel Quantity Indicator (FQI) on
an ATR 72 aeroplane mechanically impossible through a specific
design change on the ATR 72.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
modification of the ATR 72 FQI by installing a locking adaptor on
the electrical connector. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

We are issuing this AD to prevent an engine flame-out, which could
result in reduced controllability of the airplane. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0624-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 42898, July 18,
2013) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed--except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 42898, July 18, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 42898, July 18, 2013).

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD affects
25 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it takes 2 work-
hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost
about $3,882 per product. Where the service information lists required
parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there
will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty
coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than
estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of

the AD on U.S. operators to be $101,300, or $4,052 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-0624; or in person at the
Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
MCAI, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2013-21-08 ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional: Amendment
39-17632. Docket No. FAA-2013-0624; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-
071-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December 5,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to ATR--GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional
Model ATR72-101, -201, -102, -202, -211, -212, and -212A airplanes,
certificated in any category, except airplanes that have received
ATR Modification 5948 in production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of airplane incidents and
accidents that have occurred because of low-level fuel tank
situations and fuel starvation that resulted in engine flameouts. We
are issuing this AD to prevent an engine flame-out, which could
result in reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Installation

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD: Install a fuel quantity indicator (FQI) equipped with a
locking adaptor on the electrical connector, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional
Service Bulletin ATR72-28-1026, dated February 26, 2013.
    (1) For airplanes on which a fuel secondary low level detection
system is not installed: Within 24 months after the effective date
of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which a fuel secondary low level detection
system is installed: Within 36 months after the effective date of
this AD.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: The fuel secondary low level
detection system may have been installed through the embodiment of
ATR Modification 04686 in production, or as applicable, through ATR
Service Bulletins ATR72-28-1013 or ATR72-28-1022 in service.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, 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 International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-
1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(i) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2013-0047,
dated March 4, 2013, for related information. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0624-0002.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional Service Bulletin ATR72-
28-1026, dated February 26, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact ATR--
GIE Avions de Transport R[eacute]gional, 1, All[eacute]e Pierre
Nadot,

31712 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 (0) 5 62 21 62 21; fax
+33 (0) 5 62 21 67 18; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.aerochain.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 30, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-24952 Filed 10-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12375-12378]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04547]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0830; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-128-AD;
Amendment 39-17776; AD 2014-05-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report of cracking in the fuselage skin underneath the satellite
communication (SATCOM) antenna adapter. This AD requires repetitive
inspections of the visible fuselage skin and doubler if installed, for
cracking, corrosion, and any indication of contact of a certain
fastener to a bonding jumper, and repair if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracking and corrosion in the fuselage
skin, which could lead to rapid decompression and

loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective April 9, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 9,
2014.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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-2013-
0830; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melanie Violette, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 777 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
September 26, 2013 (78 FR 59293). The NPRM was prompted by a report of
cracking in the fuselage skin underneath the satellite communication
(SATCOM) antenna adapter. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections of the visible fuselage skin and doubler if installed, for
cracking, corrosion, and any indication of contact of a certain
fastener to a bonding jumper, and repair if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracking and corrosion in the fuselage
skin, which could lead to rapid decompression and loss of structural
integrity of the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
(78 FR 59293, September 26, 2013) and the FAA's response to each
comment.

Request To Revise Paragraph (h)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR 59293, September
26, 2013) To Include Footnotes

    Boeing requested that paragraph (h)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR 59293,
September 26, 2013) be revised to include the footnotes to Tables 1, 5,
and 9 of paragraph 1.E. ``Compliance,'' in addition to the
``Questionnaire Column,'' specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013. Boeing stated that the statement,
``at the time of the original issue date of this service bulletin'' is
not only used in the ``Condition Questionnaire'' column of Tables 1, 5,
and 9 of paragraph 1.E. ``Compliance,'' but it is also used in the
footnotes.
    We agree with Boeing's request. We have revised paragraph (h)(1) of
this final rule by removing the phrase ``the `Condition Questionnaire'
column in'' so that the exception applies to the entire table including
the footnotes.

Request To Revise Paragraph (h)(1) of the NPRM (78 FR 59293, September
26, 2013) To Include the Compliance Time Column of Tables 2 Through 12

    American Airlines (AA) requested that paragraph (h)(1) of the NPRM
(78 FR 59293, September 26, 2013) be revised to include exceptions for
the footnotes in Tables 1, 5, and 9, and the compliance times in Tables
2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12, as specified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013. AA stated that paragraph
(h)(1) of the NPRM creates exceptions to the service information in the
``Condition Questionnaire'' column in Tables 1, 5, and 9 of paragraph
1.E. ``Compliance'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated
June 12, 2013, in that it allows a change in wording from ``. . . at
the time of the original issue of this service bulletin'' to ``. . . as
of the effective date of this AD.'' AA stated that this exception
should be allowed for Tables 2 through 12 of paragraph 1.E.
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated
June 12, 2013.
    We partially agree with AA's request. As stated previously, we have
revised paragraph (h)(1) of this final rule to address the footnotes in
Tables 1, 5, and 9, of paragraph 1.E. ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013. However, paragraph
(h)(2) of this final rule already provides the exception for certain
compliance times for Tables 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12, of
paragraph 1.E. ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
53A0068, dated June 12, 2013. Therefore, no change is necessary to the
final rule in this regard.

Request To Add a Terminating Action

    FedEx requested that a terminating action be added prior to the
release of the final rule. FedEx stated that Boeing should revise
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013, to
include a terminating action. FedEx stated that although the initial
inspection can be planned during a scheduled maintenance visit, the
repetitive inspections will require additional, unscheduled, and out of
service time. FedEx also stated that the terminating action would
alleviate any additional maintenance, scheduled or otherwise.
    We disagree. We do not consider that delaying this action until
after the release of new service information is warranted. We do not
agree to delay this final rule while a terminating action is being
developed due to the unsafe condition that exists. However, under the
provisions of paragraph (i)(1) of this final rule, we will consider
alternative methods of compliance if sufficient data are submitted to
substantiate that the change would provide an acceptable level of
safety. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the change described previously, and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 59293, September 26, 2013) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 59293, September 26, 2013).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 120 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Action                Labor cost           Parts cost       Cost per product     Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.............  Up to 36 work-hours x               $0   Up to $3,060 per        Up to $367,200 per
                          $85 per hour = $3,060                    inspection cycle.       inspection cycle.
                          per inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2014-05-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-17776; Docket No. FAA-
2013-0830; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-128-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 9, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777-200, -200LR, -
300, -300ER, and -777F series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
53A0068, dated June 12, 2013.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking in the fuselage
skin underneath the satellite communication (SATCOM) antenna
adapter. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking and
corrosion in the fuselage skin, which could lead to rapid
decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    (1) For Groups 1-4 airplanes, and Group 5, Configurations 3 and
4 airplanes, identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-
53A0068, dated June 12, 2013: Except as required by paragraphs
(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, within the applicable compliance times
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013, do internal detailed and
surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections of the
visible fuselage skin, and doubler if installed, for cracking; do
external detailed and surface HFEC inspections of the visible
fuselage skin, and doubler if installed, for cracking, corrosion,
and any indication that shows a contact of a certain fastener to a
bonding jumper; and do all applicable repairs; in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013, except as required by paragraph
(h)(3) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the inspections at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013. Do
all applicable repairs before further flight.
    (2) For Group 5, Configurations 1, 2, and 5 airplanes,
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June
12, 2013: No action is required by this AD.

(h) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) Tables 1, 5, and 9 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013,
refer to airplanes with certain conditions ``at the time of the
original issue date of this service bulletin.'' For this AD, use
``as of the effective date of this AD'' instead of ``at the time of
the original issue date of this service bulletin.''
    (2) Where paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013, specifies a
compliance time ``after the original issue date of this service
bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) If any crack, corrosion, or indication that shows a contact
of the fastener attaching the SATCOM lug adapter plate to the
bonding plate is found during any inspection required by this AD,
and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013,
specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before further
flight, repair using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

 (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (i) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Melanie Violette,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM 120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057 3356;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12,
2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425 227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 18, 2014.
Ross Landes,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-04547 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54132-54134]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22100]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-501-000]

Texas Eastern Transmission LP; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Bailey East Mine Project and
Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Bailey East Mine Project
involving construction and operation of facilities by Texas Eastern
Transmission LP (Texas Eastern) in Marshall County, West Virginia. The
Commission will use this EA in its decision-making process to determine
whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies about issues regarding the project. The National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) requires the Commission to take into account the
environmental impacts that could result from its action whenever it
considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity. NEPA also requires the Commission to discover concerns the
public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as
``scoping.'' The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the
analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this
notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of issues
to address in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and
properly recorded, please submit your comments so that the Commission
receives them in Washington, DC on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on
November 4, 2019.
    You can make a difference by submitting your specific comments or
concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on the potential
environmental effects, reasonable

alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they
need to evaluate in the EA. Commission staff will consider all filed
comments during the preparation of the EA.
    If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the
opening of this docket on August 19, 2019, you will need to file those
comments in Docket No. CP19-501-000 to ensure they are considered as
part of this proceeding.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable easement agreement. You
are not required to enter into an agreement. However, if the Commission
approves the project, that approval conveys with it the right of
eminent domain. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach an
easement agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings in court. In such instances, compensation would be
determined by a judge in accordance with state law.
    Texas Eastern provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the
FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do
I Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC website (www.ferc.gov) at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/gas/gas.pdf.

Public Participation

    The Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which
makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances and submittals
regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe. These instant
email notifications are the fastest way to receive notification and
provide a link to the document files which can reduce the amount of
time you spend researching proceedings. To sign up go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; a comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment
on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP19-501-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Texas Eastern proposes excavate and elevate sections of four
natural gas transmission pipelines due to longwall mining activities.
According to Texas Eastern, its project would allow for safe and
efficient operation of Texas Eastern's existing pipeline facilities for
the duration of the longwall mining activities planned by CONSOL Energy
Inc. in the area beneath Texas Eastern's pipelines. The four mainline
segments will remain in-service and be elevated using sandbags and
skids for about 2 years until the longwall mining activities have
completed and any potential ground subsidence has settled. The general
location of the project facilities is shown in appendix 1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 31.8
acres of land for the excavation and elevation of the pipeline
segments. Following construction, Texas Eastern would maintain about
8.7 acres for permanent operation of the project's facilities; the
remaining acreage would be restored and revert to former uses. The
proposed pipeline excavation and elevation parallels existing pipeline
rights-of-way for 100 percent of the project.

The EA Process

    The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project under these general
headings:
     Geology and soils;
     water resources and wetlands;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     threatened and endangered species;
     cultural resources;
     land use;
     air quality and noise;
     public safety; and
     cumulative impacts.
    Commission staff will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the
proposed project or portions of the project, and make recommendations
on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present Commission staffs' independent analysis of the
issues. The EA will be available in electronic format in the public
record through eLibrary \2\ and the Commission's website (https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). If eSubscribed, you will
receive instant email notification when the EA is issued. The EA may be
issued for an allotted public comment period. Commission staff will
consider all comments on the EA before making recommendations to the
Commission. To ensure Commission staff have the opportunity to address
your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section, beginning on page 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the
last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the
environmental issues of this project to formally cooperate in the
preparation of the EA.\3\ Agencies that would like to request
cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for filing
comments provided under the Public Participation section of this
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

Consultation Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, the Commission is using this notice to initiate
consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office,
and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies,
interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential
effects on historic properties.\4\ The EA for this project will
document findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize
the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. Commission staff will update the environmental
mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that Commission notices
related to this environmental review are sent to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the proposed project.
    If the Commission issues the EA for an allotted public comment
period, a Notice of Availability of the EA will be sent to the
environmental mailing list and will provide instructions to access the
electronic document on the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov). If you need
to make changes to your name/address, or if you would like to remove
your name from the mailing list, please return the attached ``Mailing
List Update Form'' (appendix 2).

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number
in the ``Docket Number'' field, excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP19-501). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact (202)
502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of all
formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and
rulemakings.
    Public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's
calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along
with other related information.

    Dated: October 3, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-22100 Filed 10-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P