[Federal Register: July 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 32147]
[DOCID:fr07jy09-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice Of Filings 1

June 26, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER06-733-006.
    Applicants: Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership.
    Description: Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership
submits an updated market power analysis and notice of change in
status.
    Filed Date: 06/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090625-5125.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1335-000.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power Company submits revisions to the agreement
for interconnection and transmission services between Idaho Power
Company and Utah Power & Light Company.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0124.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 10, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1339-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy II LLC.
    Description: Application for market-based rate authorization,
request for related waivers and request for blanket approval under 18
CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities.
    Filed Date: 06/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090626-0054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1340-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy III LLC.
    Description: Grand Ridge Energy III LLC submits application of GR
III for authorization to make market-based wholesale sales of energy,
capacity and ancillary services under GR III's FERC Electric Tariff 1
etc.
    Filed Date: 06/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090626-0052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1341-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC.
    Description: Application for market-based rate authorization,
request for related waivers and request for blanket approval under 18
CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities.
    Filed Date: 06/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090626-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1342-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy V LLC.
    Description: Application for market-based rate authorization,
request for related waivers and request for blanket approval under 18
CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities.
    Filed Date: 06/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090626-0051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

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

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-15939 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58773-58774]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22473]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9916-92-OSWER]

Access to Confidential Business Information by Eastern Research
Group, Incorporated

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of access to data.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will authorize its
contractor Eastern Research Group, Incorporated (ERG) to access
Confidential Business Information (CBI) which has been submitted to EPA
under the authority of all sections of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, as amended. EPA has issued regulations
that outline business confidentiality provisions for the Agency and
require all EPA Offices that receive information designated by the
submitter, as CBI to abide by these provisions.

DATES: Access to confidential data submitted to EPA will occur no
sooner than October 10, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaShan Haynes, Document Control
Officer, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, (5305P), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Access to Confidential Business Information

    Under EPA Contract No. EP-W-10-055, ERG, Incorporated will assist
the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR), Resource
Conservation and Sustainability Division (RCSD) in developing the Waste
Characterization Report to analyze the composition and amounts of the
United States' Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and other wastes, and how
these materials are recycled, combusted, and landfilled. The
methodology used in this report is a ``top-down'' materials flow
approach to estimate the size of the waste stream data. This report may
typically involve one or more of the following statutes: CAA, CWA,
RCRA, TSCA, FIFRA, EPCRA and the SDWA. Some of the data collected
voluntarily from industry, may be claimed by industry to contain trade
secrets or CBI. In accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 2,
Subpart B, ORCR has established policies and procedures for handling
information collected from industry, under the authority of RCRA,
including RCRA

Confidential Business Information Security Manuals.
    ERG, Incorporated shall protect from unauthorized disclosure all
information designated as confidential and shall abide by all RCRA CBI
requirements, including procedures outlined in the RCRA CBI Security
Manual.
    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued regulations (40
CFR Part 2, Subpart B) that outline business confidentiality provisions
for the Agency and require all EPA Offices that receive information
designated by the submitter as CBI to abide by these provisions. ERG,
Incorporated will be authorized to have access to RCRA CBI under the
EPA ``Contractor Requirements for the Control and Security of RCRA
Confidential Business Information Security Manual.''
    EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information
under all sections of RCRA that ERG, Incorporated under the contract
may have access to RCRA CBI. Access to RCRA CBI under this contract
will take place at ERG's Chantilly, Virginia and Prairie View, Kansas
offices, and when necessary, EPA Headquarters only. Contractor
personnel at each location will be required to sign non-disclosure
agreements and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures
before they are permitted access to confidential information.

    Dated: September 4, 2014.
Barnes Johnson,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation & Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2014-22473 Filed 9-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 54700]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19293]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2020-N-2029]

Proposal To Withdraw Approval of MAKENA; Hearing; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of hearing; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice
entitled ``Proposal To Withdraw Approval of MAKENA; Hearing'' that
appeared in the Federal Register of August 17, 2022. The document
announced the hearing on the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research's
proposal to withdraw approval of MAKENA (hydroxyprogesterone caproate
injection, 250 milligrams per milliliter, once weekly), new drug
application 021945, held by Covis Pharma Group/Covis Pharma GmbH. The
document was published with an incorrect deadline. This document
corrects that error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachael Vieder Linowes, Office of
Scientific Integrity, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4206, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of August 17, 2022
(87 FR 50626), in FR Doc. 2022-17715, on page 50628, the following
correction is made:
    1. On page 50628, in the last paragraph of the second column, in
the first sentence, ``September 6, 2022'' is corrected to ``September
14, 2022.''

    Dated: September 1, 2022.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-19293 Filed 9-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 95128-95129]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31147]

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

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: EC17-50-000.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: Application Pursuant to Section 203 of the Federal
Power Act to Acquire New Assets of ITC Midwest LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5425.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1817-015; ER10-1818-014; ER10-1819-016; ER10-
1820-019.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation,
Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation, Public Service
Company of Colorado, Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Supplement to November 7, 2016 Notice of Change in
Status of Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, et
al.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5375.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3177-001; ER10-3181-001; ER10-3285-001.
    Applicants: UGI Utilities, Inc., UGI Development Company, UGI
Energy Services, LLC.
    Description: Updated Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast
region of the UGI MBR Companies.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5294.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/17/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1775-003.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Basin Electric Power Cooperative
Formula Rate Compliance Filing to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20161220-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1943-002.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Missouri River Energy Services
Formula Rate Compliance Filing to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 12/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20161220-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-581-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original Service Agreement
No. SGIA-ISONE/CMP-16-01 under Schedule 23 to be effective 11/30/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5339.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.
    Docket Numbers: ER17-582-000.
    Applicants: Westside Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Westside Solar, LLC
Application for MBR Authority to be effective 2/17/2017.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5352.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.
    Docket Numbers: ER17-583-000.
    Applicants: Whitney Point Solar, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Whitney Point Solar, LLC
Application for MBR Authority to be effective 2/17/2017.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5353.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-584-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Queue Position AB2-027,
Original Service Agreement No. 4588 to be effective 11/18/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5354.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.
    Docket Numbers: ER17-585-000.
    Applicants: Michigan Electric Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Cancellation of
METC RS No. 7 to be effective 11/19/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5357.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-586-000.
    Applicants: International Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Termination of
ITCT RS No. 10 to be effective 11/19/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/19/16.
    Accession Number: 20161219-5360.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/9/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-587-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3290 Sholes Wind Energy, LLC
GIA to be effective 12/5/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20161220-5033.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-588-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 1135R1 Public Service Co of
OK and GRDA Interconnection Agr to be effective 12/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20161220-5034.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-589-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3283 NextEra Energy and
Sunflower Electric Meter Agent Agreement to be effective 12/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 12/20/16.
    Accession Number: 20161220-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/17.
    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: December 20, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-31147 Filed 12-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 125)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 36473-36475]
[DOCID:fr27jn08-20]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0674; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-086-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Model
Falcon 10 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Model
Falcon 10 airplanes. The existing AD currently requires either revising
the airplane flight manual (AFM) and installing a placard in the flight
deck to prohibit flight into known or forecasted icing conditions, or
repetitively inspecting for delamination of the flexible hoses in the
wing (slat) anti-icing system and performing corrective actions if
necessary. The existing AD also requires replacement of the flexible
hoses installed in the slat anti-icing systems, which ends the
repetitive inspections. This proposed AD would continue to require
replacement of the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing
systems with new hoses, but at intervals defined in flight hours
instead of flight cycles. This proposed AD results from information we
received from operators and the airplane manufacturer indicating that
the repetitive interval for the required replacement deviated from the
referenced service information. We are proposing this AD to prevent
collapse of the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which
could lead to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is
encountered in this situation, could result in reduced controllability
of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault
Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0674;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-086-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On August 17, 2007, we issued AD 2007-18-08, amendment 39-15188 (72
FR 51161, September 6, 2007), for all Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet
Model Falcon 10 airplanes. That AD requires either revising the
airplane flight manual (AFM) and installing a placard in the flight
deck to prohibit flight into known or forecasted icing conditions, or
repetitively inspecting for delamination of the flexible hoses in the
wing (slat) anti-icing system and performing corrective actions if
necessary. That AD also requires replacement of the flexible hoses
installed in the slat anti-icing systems with new hoses, which ends the
repetitive inspections. That AD resulted from a report of in-service
delamination of a flexible hose in the slat anti-icing system at a time
earlier than previously reported. We issued that AD to prevent collapse
of the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which could lead
to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is encountered in
this situation, could result in reduced controllability of the
airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since issuance of AD 2007-18-08, we have received information from
operators and the airplane manufacturer indicating that the repetitive
interval for accomplishing the replacement of the flexible hoses
required by paragraph (k) of that AD deviated from the referenced
service information (i.e., Dassault Service Bulletin F10-313, Revision
1, dated May 10, 2006). As published, paragraph (k) of AD 2007-11-07
reads ``* * * Repeat the hose replacement at intervals not to exceed
700 flight cycles.'' The term ``flight cycles'' is incorrect. We
inadvertently used the term ``flight cycles'' instead of ``flight
hours'' in this sentence. Therefore, we have determined that additional
rulemaking is necessary to revise the repetitive interval for replacing
the flexible hoses from 700 flight cycles to 700 flight hours.

Existing Relevant Service Information

    Dassault has previously issued Service Bulletin F10-313, Revision
1, dated May 10, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for
replacing the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing system
with new hoses. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The
EASA mandated the service information and issued EASA airworthiness
directive 2006-0114, dated May 10, 2006, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    These airplanes are manufactured in France and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. As described in FAA
Order 8100.14A, ``Interim Procedures for Working with the European
Community on Airworthiness Certification and Continued Airworthiness,''
dated August 12, 2005, the EASA has kept the FAA informed of the
situation described above. We have examined the EASA's findings,
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to
issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for
operation in the United States.
    This proposed AD would supersede AD 2007-18-08 and would continue
to require replacement of the flexible hoses installed in the slat
anti-icing systems with new hoses, but at new repetitive intervals.
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in
service bulletin described previously.

Change to Existing AD

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2007-18-
08. As a result, the corresponding paragraph identifiers have changed
in this proposed AD, as listed in the following table:

                      Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Corresponding requirement in
       Requirement in AD 2007-18-08               this proposed AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
paragraph (k).............................   paragraph (f).
paragraph (l).............................   paragraph (g).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-registered
                Action                     Work hours         Parts           Cost per airplane              airplanes                 Fleet cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hose replacement......................               8             $880   $1,520 per replacement     Up to 146................  Up to $221,920, per
                                                                           cycle.                                                replacement cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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 that the 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); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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

    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]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-15188 (72 FR 51161, September 6, 2007) and adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Aviation (AMD/BA): Docket No. FAA-
2008-0674; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-086-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 28,
2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2007-18-08.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Avions Marcel Dassault-Breguet Model
Falcon 10 airplanes, certificated in any category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from information we received from operators
and the airplane manufacturer indicating that the repetitive
interval for the required replacement deviated from the referenced
service information. We are issuing this AD to prevent collapse of
the flexible hoses in the slat anti-icing system, which could lead
to insufficient anti-icing capability and, if icing is encountered
in this situation, could result in reduced controllability of the
airplane.

Compliance

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

Certain Requirements of AD 2007-18-08

Hose Replacement

    (f) Within 330 flight hours or 7 months after October 11, 2007
(the effective date of AD 2007-18-08), whichever occurs first:
Replace the flexible hoses installed in the slat anti-icing system
with new hoses having part number (P/N) FAL1007, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F10-
313, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2006. Repeat the hose replacement
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 700 flight cycles, except as
provided by paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (g) Replacement of a hose before October 11, 2007, in accordance
with Dassault Service Bulletin F10-313, dated August 10, 2005, is
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (f) of
this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

New Repetitive Interval

    (h) As of the effective date of this AD, repeat the hose
replacement required by paragraph (f) of this AD within 700 flight
hours since the last replacement, or within 100 flight hours after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, and
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 700 flight hours.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, ATTN:
Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Related Information

    (j) European Aviation Safety Agency airworthiness directive
2006-0114, dated May 10, 2006, also addresses the subject of this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 8, 2008.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-14575 Filed 6-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38703-38704]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15404]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. CP09-6-001; PF12-7-000; Docket No. CP09-7-001]

LNG Development Company (d/b/a Oregon LNG); Oregon Pipeline
Company, LLC; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on June 7, 2013, LNG Development Company, LLC (d/
b/a Oregon LNG) (Oregon LNG), 8100 NE Parkway Drive, Suite 165,
Vancouver, WA 98662, filed in Docket No. CP9-6-001 an application to
amend its application filed on October 10, 2008 in Docket No. CP09-6-
000 pursuant to Section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 153
and 380 of the Commission's regulations, seeking authorization to site,
construct and operate a bi-directional LNG terminal and associated
facilities in the town of Warrenton in Clatstop County, Oregon, as both
a place of exit for the exportation of LNG and as a place of entry for
the importation of LNG.
    Also take notice that on June 7, 2013, Oregon Pipeline Company,
LLC, (Oregon Pipeline Company), 8100 NE Parkway Drive, Suite 165,
Vancouver, WA 98662, filed in Docket No. CP9-7-001 an application to
amend its application filed on October 10, 2008 in Docket No. CP09-7-
000 pursuant to Section 7(c) of the NGA and Parts 157 and 284 of the
Commission's regulations, to modify the proposed pipeline route and
certain facilities, as well as to enable bi-directional flow of gas on
the pipeline. As modified, the proposed pipeline would be routed
through Clatsop, Columbia, and Tillamook Counties in Oregon, and
Cowlitz County in Washington, and end at a new interconnect with the
system of Northwest Pipeline GP (Northwest) near Woodland, Washington.
    Specifically, the proposed project will entail the construction,
operation and maintenance of the following major facilities: (i) A
bidirectional LNG receiving and export facility (including berthing
accommodations for a single LNG vessel, unloading facilities, and
associated piping and appurtenances); (ii) a liquefaction facility
consisting of two liquefaction trains of 4.5 million metric tons per
annum each, for an overall nominal liquefaction rate of up to 9.0 MTPA;
(iii) vaporization facilities with a base load natural gas send out
capacity of 0.5 Bscf/d; (iv) LNG storage facilities (including two LNG
storage tanks and associated piping and control equipment) capable of
storing a total of 320,000 cubic meters of LNG; (v) associated
utilities, infrastructure and support systems; and (vi) an
approximately 86.8-mile-long, 36-inch diameter pipeline, which will
employ a maximum allowable operating pressure of 1,440 pounds per
square inch gauge and deliverability of up to 1.25 Bscf/d, all as more
fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission
and open to public inspection, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. Copies of this filing are available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room, or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding these applications should be directed to
Peter Hansen, LNG Development Company, LLC, 8100 NE Parkway Drive,
Suite 165, Vancouver, WA 98662,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
Lisa M. Tonery, Fulbright & Jaworski LLP, 666 Fifth Avenue, New York,
NY 10103,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On July 16, 2012, the Commission staff granted LNG Development
Company, LLC and Oregon Pipeline Company (collectively referred as
Oregon LNG) request to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned
Docket No. PF12-18 to staff activities involved with Oregon LNG's
Bidirectional Project. Now, as of the filing of the application on June
7, 2013, the Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this
time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in Docket Nos. CP09-6-
001 and CP09-7-001, as noted in the caption of this Notice.
    Because the environmental review of Oregon LNG's Bidirectional
Project must also include Northwest's connecting supply pipeline to the
LNG terminal, the Commission cannot begin preparation of the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, until Pacific Connector's application
is filed. Within 90 days after the Commission issues a Notice of
Application for the Northwest application, the Commission staff will
issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review that will indicate
the anticipated date for the Commission's staff issuance of the final
EIS analyzing both proposals. The issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will also serve to notify federal and state
agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and
the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90
days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's final EIS.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, before the
comment date of this notice, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party
status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary
of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the
applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of
filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant
and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the
proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the
proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in

determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a
comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments
in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to
the party or parties directly involved in the protest.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link. Persons unable to file
electronically should submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or
intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 11, 2013.

    Dated: June 20, 2013.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-15404 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66734-66736]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23364]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0244]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Transco, Inc.; Application for
Exemption

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that it has received an application from
Transco, Inc. (Transco) for an exemption from the 30-minute rest break
provision of the Agency's hours-of-service (HOS) regulations for
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers. Transco requests that its
drivers be permitted to comply with the 30-minute rest break
requirement while performing on-duty, not-driving tasks. The requested
exemption would apply to all Transco drivers in its grocery and
foodservice divisions who provide driving and delivery services to
their customers. Due to the nature of their operation, Transco believes
that compliance with the 30-minute rest break rule negatively impacts
the overall safety and general health of its CMV drivers, and therefore
requests this exemption for all of its company drivers. FMCSA requests
public comment on Transco's application for exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2016-0244 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to www.regulations.gov at any time or visit Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
notice, contact Mr. Thomas Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver and Carrier
Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety
Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact
Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2016-0244), indicate

the specific section of this document to which the comment applies, and
provide a reason for suggestions or recommendations. You may submit
your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone
number in the body of your document so the Agency can contact you if it
has questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2016-0244'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard
or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received
during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application
based on your comments.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the
Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Request for Exemption

    On December 27, 2011 (76 FR 81133), FMCSA published a final rule
amending its hours-of-service (HOS) regulations for drivers of
property-carrying CMVs. The final rule adopted several changes to the
HOS rules, including a new provision requiring drivers to take a rest
break during the work day under certain circumstances. Drivers may
drive a CMV only if 8 hours or less have passed since the end of the
driver's last off-duty or sleeper-berth period of at least 30 minutes.
FMCSA did not specify when drivers must take the 30-minute break, but
the rule requires that they wait no longer than 8 hours after the last
off-duty or sleeper-berth period of that length or longer to take the
break if they want to drive.
    Transco seeks an exemption from the 30-minute rest break provision
in 49 CFR 395.3(a)(3)(ii). Transco operates through McLane Company,
Inc., its commonly-owned affiliate, which delivers food products and
other goods to various grocery stores and restaurants throughout the
United States. McLane's Grocery and Foodservice divisions maintain
distribution centers throughout the country, each employing between 100
and 300 drivers. McLane's drivers provide just-in-time food delivery
services to its customers, which include convenience stores, mass
merchants, and various dining establishments. Transco contends that its
drivers/operations differ greatly from the average long-haul CMV driver
for the following reasons:
     Multi-stop daily deliveries: Its drivers typically make
daily multi-stop deliveries to Transco's customers, returning to their
originating distribution center at the end of each load, which takes an
average of 19 hours. On average, each Transco driver makes nine stops
per day;
     Significant physical activity: Each delivery requires the
driver to get in and out of the CMV on multiple occasions to unload
grocery, fresh food, and other products for delivery. Specifically,
deliveries to smaller customers, which comprise the majority of each
driver's deliveries, include parking the CMV close the customer's
store, lowering a ramp from the rear of the CMV to the ground, and off-
loading freight using a two-wheeled cart into the store. For larger
customers, the driver delivers the freight at the customer's loading
dock; and
     Breaks in the driving routine: Each delivery effectively
breaks up the otherwise uninterrupted driving routine. The physical
activities that Transco drivers engage in on a daily basis differs
significantly from those of long-haul truck drivers who often do not
engage in vigorous physical activity.
    According to Transco, as a result of these operational differences,
the 30-minute rest break requirement does not increase safety when
applied to its drivers; instead, the applicant claims the requirement
may very well decrease road safety for its drivers. For the typical
long-haul CMV driver, the 30-minute rest break serves as an opportunity
to break the monotony of driving and relieve some of the stress of
continuous driving, but for Transco's drivers, by the nature of the
work they currently have breaks--which includes physical exercise--
several times each day.
    Additionally, Transco states that the 30-minute rest break
requirement causes its drivers to travel over 8.2 million additional
miles each year on more than 18,000 additional loads. This increase in
miles traveled results in eight additional reportable accidents per
year, and also requires Transco CMVs to use over 1.3 million more
gallons of fuel each year. This influx of CMVs on public highways also
increases congestion, and wear on critical infrastructure. The 30-
minute rest-break requirement also degrades the health of Transco's
drivers as leading clinical studies reveal sedentary activities
substantially increase the risk of cardiovascular disease among adults.
By insisting that the rest-break requirement be performed off-duty, it
essentially forces Transco's drivers to stop physical activity and
become sedentary.
    Transco believes that the granting of this exemption would offer
two benefits--(1) the exemption would reduce the number of motor
vehicle accidents and congestion on public roads by reducing the
overall miles travelled to serve its customers; and (2) the exemption
would increase the health of their drivers by increasing their physical
activity through the course of their deliveries and substantially
reducing any sedentary periods. Transco contends that under the
exemption, its operations would maintain a level of safety equivalent
to, if not greater than, that achieved by complying with the
regulation. In its application, Transco lists a number of on-going
company safety activities already in place to provide continuous
training to drivers about both safety policy violations and driving
behaviors that increase risk. These activities include on-board visual
monitoring systems, Automatic On-Board Recording Devices, driver
training, weekly safety

inspections, full compliance assessments, and periodic safety committee
meetings, which Transco contends would ensure an equivalent level of
safety if the requested exemption is granted.
    A copy of the Transco's application for exemption is available for
review in the docket for this notice.

    Issued on: September 15, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-23364 Filed 9-27-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


APPENDIX

Clean Air Act Section 176(c) and (d)

As Amended by SAFETEA-LU

NOTE:  This document includes Clean Air Act section 176(c) and (d) as
amended by SAFETEA-LU.  EPA and US DOT are providing this document for
informational purposes only as an official version of the revised
section is not yet available.

From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access

[wais.access.gpo.gov]

[Laws in effect as of January 7, 2003]

[Document not affected by Public Laws enacted between

  January 7, 2003 and February 12, 2003]

[CITE: 42USC7506]

TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

CHAPTER 85--AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL

SUBCHAPTER I--PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES

Part D--Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas

subpart 1--nonattainment areas in general

Sec. 7506. Limitations on certain Federal assistance

(a), (b) Repealed. Pub. L. 101-549, title I, Sec. 110(4), Nov. 15, 1990,

        104 Stat. 2470

(c) Activities not conforming to approved or promulgated plans

    (1) No department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal
Government shall engage in, support in any way or provide financial
assistance for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does
not conform to an implementation plan after it has been approved or
promulgated under section 7410 of this title. No metropolitan planning
organization designated under section 134 of title 23, shall give its
approval to any project, program, or plan which does not conform to an
implementation plan approved or promulgated under section 7410 of this
title. The assurance of conformity to such an implementation plan shall
be an affirmative responsibility of the head of such department, agency,
or instrumentality. Conformity to an implementation plan means--

        (A) conformity to an implementation plan's purpose of
eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of the
national ambient air quality standards and achieving expeditious
attainment of such standards; and

        (B) that such activities will not--

            (i) cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard
in any area;

            (ii) increase the frequency or severity of any existing
violation of any standard in any area; or

            (iii) delay timely attainment of any standard or any
required interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area.

The determination of conformity shall be based on the most recent
estimates of emissions, and such estimates shall be determined from the
most recent population, employment, travel and congestion estimates as
determined by the metropolitan planning organization or other agency
authorized to make such estimates.

    (2) Any transportation plan or program developed pursuant to title
23 or chapter 53 of title 49 shall implement the transportation
provisions of any applicable implementation plan approved under this
chapter applicable to all or part of the area covered by such
transportation plan or program. No Federal agency may approve, accept or
fund any transportation plan, program or project unless such plan,
program or project has been found to conform to any applicable
implementation plan in effect under this chapter. In particular--

        (A) no transportation plan or transportation improvement program
may be adopted by a metropolitan planning organization designated under
title 23 or chapter 53 of title 49, or be found to be in conformity by a
metropolitan planning organization until a final determination has been
made that emissions expected from implementation of such plans and
programs are consistent with estimates of emissions from motor vehicles
and necessary emissions reductions contained in the applicable
implementation plan, and that the plan or program will conform to the
requirements of paragraph (1)(B);

        (B) no metropolitan planning organization or other recipient of
funds under title 23 or chapter 53 of title 49 shall adopt or approve a
transportation improvement program of projects until it determines that
such program provides for timely implementation of transportation
control measures consistent with schedules included in the applicable
implementation plan;

        (C) a transportation project may be adopted or approved by a
metropolitan planning organization or any recipient of funds designated
under title 23 or chapter 53 of title 49, or found in conformity by a
metropolitan planning organization or approved, accepted, or funded by
the Department of Transportation only if it meets either the
requirements of subparagraph (D) or the following requirements--

            (i) such a project comes from a conforming plan and program;

            (ii) the design concept and scope of such project have not
changed significantly since the conformity finding regarding the plan
and program from which the project derived; and

            (iii) the design concept and scope of such project at the
time of the conformity determination for the program was adequate to
determine emissions.

        (D) Any project not referred to in subparagraph (C) shall be
treated as conforming to the applicable implementation plan only if it
is demonstrated that the projected emissions from such project, when
considered together with emissions projected for the conforming
transportation plans and programs within the nonattainment area, do not
cause such plans and programs to exceed the emission reduction
projections and schedules assigned to such plans and programs in the
applicable implementation plan.

(E) The appropriate metropolitan planning organization shall redetermine
conformity of existing transportation plans and programs not later than
2 years after the date on which the Administrator—

(i) finds a motor vehicle emissions budget to be adequate in accordance
with section 93.118(e)(4) of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as
in effect on October 1, 2004);

(ii) approves an implementation plan that establishes a motor vehicle
emissions budget if that budget has not yet been determined to be
adequate in accordance with clause (i); or

(iii) promulgates an implementation plan that establishes or revises a
motor vehicle emissions budget.

    (3) Until such time as the implementation plan revision referred to
in paragraph (4)(C) is approved, conformity of such plans, programs, and
projects will be demonstrated if--

        (A) the transportation plans and programs--

            (i) are consistent with the most recent estimates of mobile
source emissions;

            (ii) provide for the expeditious implementation of
transportation control measures in the applicable implementation plan;
and

            (iii) with respect to ozone and carbon monoxide
nonattainment areas, contribute to annual emissions reductions
consistent with sections 7511a(b)(1) and 7512a(a)(7) of this title; and

        (B) the transportation projects--

            (i) come from a conforming transportation plan and program
as defined in subparagraph (A) or for 12 months after November 15, 1990,
from a transportation program found to conform within 3 years prior to
November 15, 1990; and

            (ii) in carbon monoxide nonattainment areas, eliminate or
reduce the severity and number of violations of the carbon monoxide
standards in the area substantially affected by the project.

    With regard to subparagraph (B)(ii), such determination may be made
as part of either the conformity determination for the transportation
program or for the individual project taken as a whole during the
environmental review phase of project development.

    (4) Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity (A) No later
than one year after November 15, 1990, the Administrator shall
promulgate

(A) In general—The Administrator shall promulgate, and periodically
update,

criteria and procedures for determining conformity (except in the case
of transportation plans, programs, and projects) of, and for keeping the
Administrator informed about, the activities referred to in paragraph
(1). No later than one year after November 15, 1990, the Administrator,
with the concurrence of the Secretary of Transportation, shall
promulgate

(B) Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects–The Administrator,
with the concurrence of the Secretary of Transportation, shall
promulgate, and periodically update, criteria and procedures for
demonstrating and assuring conformity in the case of transportation
plans, programs, and projects. A suit

(C ) Civil Action to Compel Promulgation—A civil action may be brought
against the Administrator and the Secretary of Transportation under
section 7604 of this title to compel promulgation of such criteria and
procedures and the Federal district court shall have jurisdiction to
order such promulgation.

(BD) The procedures and criteria shall, at a minimum--

             (i) address the consultation procedures to be undertaken by
metropolitan planning organizations and the Secretary of Transportation
with State and local air quality agencies and State departments of
transportation before such organizations and the Secretary make
conformity determinations;

             (ii) address the appropriate frequency for making
conformity determinations, but in no case shall such determinations for
transportation plans and programs be less frequent than every three
years; the frequency for making conformity determinations on updated
transportation plans and programs shall be every 4 years, except in a
case in which—

	(I) the metropolitan planning organization elects to update a
transportation plan or program more frequently; or

	(II) the metropolitan planning organization is required to determine
conformity in accordance with paragraph (2)(E); and

             (iii) address how conformity determinations will be made
with respect to maintenance plans.

 	(CE) Such procedures shall also include a requirement that each State
shall submit to the Administrator and the Secretary of Transportation
within 24 months of November 15, 1990, a revision to its implementation
plan that includes criteria and procedures for assessing the conformity
of any plan, program, or project subject to the conformity requirements
of this subsection. INCLUSION OF CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES IN SIP.—Not
later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the SAFETEA–LU the
procedures under subparagraph (A) shall include a requirement that each
State include in the State implementation plan criteria and procedures
for consultation required by subparagraph (D)(i), and enforcement and
enforceability (pursuant to sections 93.125(c) and 93.122(a)(4)(ii) of
title 40, Code of Federal Regulations) in accordance with the
Administrator’s criteria and procedures for consultation, enforcement
and enforceability.’’.

(DF) Compliance with the rules of the Administrator for determining the
conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects funded or
approved under title 23 or chapter 53 of title 49 to State or Federal
implementation plans shall not be required for traffic signal
synchronization projects prior to the funding, approval or
implementation of such projects. The supporting regional emissions
analysis for any conformity determination made with respect to a
transportation plan, program, or project shall consider the effect on
emissions of any such project funded, approved, or implemented prior to
the conformity determination.

    (5) Applicability.--This subsection shall apply only with respect
to—

	(A) a nonattainment area and each pollutant for which the area is
designated as a nonattainment area; and

	(B) an area that was designated as a nonattainment area but that was
later redesignated by the Administrator as an attainment area and that
is required to develop a maintenance plan under section 7505a of this
title with respect to the specific pollutant for which the area was
designated nonattainment.

    (6) Notwithstanding paragraph 5,\1\ this subsection shall not apply
with respect to an area designated nonattainment under section
7407(d)(1) of this title until 1 year after that area is first
designated nonattainment for a specific national ambient air quality
standard. This paragraph only applies with respect to the national
ambient air quality standard for which an area is newly designated
nonattainment and does not affect the area's requirements with respect
to all other national ambient air quality standards for which the area
is designated nonattainment or has been redesignated from nonattainment
to attainment with a maintenance plan pursuant to section 7505a \2\ of
this title (including any pre-existing national ambient air quality
standard for a pollutant for which a new or revised standard has been
issued).

    (7) CONFORMITY HORIZON FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANS.—

     (A) IN GENERAL.—Each conformity determination required under this
section for a transportation plan under section 134(i) of title 23,
United States Code, or section 5303(i) of title 49, United States Code,
shall require a demonstration of conformity for the period ending on
either the final year of the transportation plan, or at the election of
the metropolitan planning organization, after consultation with the air
pollution control agency and solicitation of public comments and
consideration of such comments, the longest of the following periods:

(i) The first 10-year period of any such transportation plan.

(ii) The latest year in the implementation plan applicable to the area
that contains a motor vehicle emission budget.

(iii) The year after the completion date of a regionally significant
project if the project is included in the transportation improvement
program or the project requires approval before the subsequent
conformity determination.

(B) REGIONAL EMISSIONS ANALYSIS.—The conformity determination shall be
accompanied by a regional emissions analysis for the last year of the
transportation plan and for any year shown to exceed emission budgets by
a prior analysis, if such year extends beyond the applicable period as
determined under subparagraph (A).

(C) EXCEPTION.—In any case in which an area has a revision to an
implementation plan under section 175A(b) and the Administrator has
found the motor vehicles emissions budgets from that revision to be
adequate in accordance with section 93.118(e)(4) of title 40, Code of
Federal Regulations (as in effect on October 1, 2004), or has approved
the revision, the demonstration of conformity at the election of the
metropolitan planning organization, after consultation with the air
pollution control agency and solicitation of public comments and
consideration of such comments, shall be required to extend only through
the last year of the implementation plan required under section 175A(b).

(D) EFFECT OF ELECTION.—Any election by a metropolitan planning
organization under this paragraph shall continue in effect until the
metropolitan planning organization elects otherwise.

(E) AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY DEFINED.—In this paragraph, the term
‘air pollution control agency’ means an air pollution control agency
(as defined in section 302(b)) that is responsible for developing plans
or controlling air pollution within the area covered by a transportation
plan.

    (8) SUBSTITUTION OF TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—Transportation control measures that are specified in
an implementation plan may be replaced or added to the implementation
plan with alternate or additional transportation control measures

(i) if the substitute measures achieve equivalent or greater emissions
reductions than the control measure to be replaced, as demonstrated with
an emissions impact analysis that is consistent with the current
methodology used for evaluating the replaced control measure in the
implementation plan;

(ii) if the substitute control measures are implemented—

(I) in accordance with a schedule that is consistent with the schedule
provided for control measures in the implementation plan; or

(II) if the implementation plan date for implementation of the control
measure to be replaced has passed, as soon as practicable after the
implementation plan date but not later than the date on which emission
reductions are necessary to achieve the purpose of the implementation
plan;

(iii) if the substitute and additional control measures are accompanied
with evidence of adequate personnel and funding and authority under
State or local law to implement, monitor, and enforce the control
measures;

(iv) if the substitute and additional control measures were developed
through a collaborative process that included—

(I) participation by representatives of all affected jurisdictions
(including local air pollution control agencies, the State air pollution
control agency, and State and local transportation agencies);

(II) consultation with the Administrator; and

(III) reasonable public notice and opportunity for comment; and

(v) if the metropolitan planning organization, State air pollution
control agency, and the Administrator concur with the equivalency of the
substitute or additional control measures.

(B) ADOPTION.—

(i) Concurrence by the metropolitan planning organization, State air
pollution control agency and the Administrator as required by
subparagraph (A)(v) shall constitute adoption of the substitute or
additional control measures so long as the requirements of subparagraphs
(A)(i), (A)(ii), (A)(iii) and (A)(iv) are met.

(ii) Once adopted, the substitute or additional control measures become,
by operation of law, part of the State implementation plan and become
federally enforceable.

(iii) Within 90 days of its concurrence under subparagraph (A)(v), the
State air pollution control agency shall submit the substitute or
additional control measure to the Administrator for incorporation in the
codification of the applicable implementation plan. Nothwithstanding any
other provision of this Act, no additional State process shall be
necessary to support such revision to the applicable plan.

(C) NO REQUIREMENT FOR EXPRESS PERMISSION.—The substitution or
addition of a transportation control measure in accordance with this
paragraph and the funding or approval of such a control measure shall
not be contingent on the existence of any provision in the applicable
implementation plan that expressly permits such a substitution or
addition.

(D) NO REQUIREMENT FOR NEW CONFORMITY DETERMINATION.— The substitution
or addition of a transportation control measure in accordance with this
paragraph shall not require—

(i) a new conformity determination for the transportation plan; or

(ii) a revision of the implementation plan.

(E) CONTINUATION OF CONTROL MEASURE BEING REPLACED.—A control measure
that is being replaced by a substitute control measure under this
paragraph shall remain in effect until the substitute control measure is
adopted by the State pursuant to subparagraph (B).

(F) EFFECT OF ADOPTION.—Adoption of a substitute control measure shall
constitute rescission of the previously applicable control measure.

    (9) LAPSE OF CONFORMITY.—If a conformity determination required
under this subsection for a transportation plan under section 134(i) of
title 23, United States Code, or section 5303(i) of title 49, United
States Code, or a transportation improvement program under section
134(j) of such title 23 or under section 5303(j) of such title 49 is not
made by the applicable deadline and such failure is not corrected by
additional measures to either reduce motor vehicle emissions sufficient
to demonstrate

compliance with the requirements of this subsection within 12 months
after such deadline or other measures sufficient to correct such
failures, the transportation plan shall lapse.

    (10) LAPSE.—In this subsection, the term ‘lapse’ means that
the conformity determination for a transportation plan or transportation
improvement program has expired, and thus there is no currently
conforming transportation plan or transportation improvement
program.’’.

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

    \1\ So in original. Probably should be ``paragraph (5),''.

    \2\ See References in Text note below.

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

(d) Priority of achieving and maintaining national primary ambient air
quality standards

    Each department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal
Government having authority to conduct or support any program with
air-quality related transportation consequences shall give priority in
the exercise of such authority, consistent with statutory requirements
for allocation among States or other jurisdictions, to the
implementation of those portions of plans prepared under this section to
achieve and maintain the national primary ambient air-quality standard.
This

paragraph extends to, but is not limited to, authority exercised under
chapter 53 of title 49, title 23, and the Housing and Urban Development
Act.

(July 14, 1955, ch. 360, title I, Sec. 176, as added Pub. L. 95-95,
title I, Sec. 129(b), Aug. 7, 1977, 91 Stat. 749; amended Pub. L.
95-190, Sec. 14(a)(59), Nov. 16, 1977, 91 Stat. 1403; Pub. L. 101-549,
title I, Secs. 101(f), 110(4), Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2409, 2470; Pub.
L. 104-59, title III, Sec. 305(b), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 580; Pub.
L.104-260, Sec. 1, Oct. 9, 1996, 110 Stat. 3175; Pub. L. 106-377, Sec.
1(a)(1) [title III], Oct. 27, 2000, 114 Stat. 1441, 1441A-44.)

                       References in Text

    Section 7505a of this title, referred to in subsec. (c)(6), was in
the original ``section 175(A)'' and was translated as reading ``section
175A'', meaning section 175A of act July 14, 1955, which is classified
to section 7505a of this title, to reflect the probable intent of
Congress.

    The Housing and Urban Development Act, referred to in subsec. (d),
may be the name for a series of acts sharing the same name but enacted
in different years by Pub. L. 89-117, Aug. 10, 1965, 79 Stat. 451; Pub.
L. 90-448, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 476; Pub. L. 91-152, Dec. 24, 1969, 83

Stat. 379; and Pub. L. 91-609, Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1770,
respectively. For complete classification of these Acts to the Code, see
Short Title notes set out under section 1701 of Title 12, Banks and
Banking, and Tables.

                          Codification

    In subsecs. (c)(2) and (d), ``chapter 53 of title 49'' substituted
for ``the Urban Mass Transportation Act [49 App. U.S.C. 1601 et seq.]''
and in subsec. (c)(4)(D) substituted for ``Federal Transit Act'' on
authority of Pub. L. 103-272, Sec. 6(b), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1378

(the first section of which enacted subtitles II, III, and V to X of
Title 49, Transportation), and of Pub. L. 102-240, title III, Sec.
3003(b), Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2088, which provided that

references in laws to the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 be
deemed to be references to the Federal Transit Act.

                               Amendments

    2000--Subsec. (c)(6). Pub. L. 106-377 added par. (6).

    1996--Subsec. (c)(4)(D). Pub. L. 104-260 added subpar. (D).

    1995--Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 104-59 added par. (5).

    1990--Subsecs. (a), (b). Pub. L. 101-549, Sec. 110(4), struck out
subsec. (a) which related to approval of projects or award of grants,
and subsec. (b) which related to implementation of approved or
promulgated plans.

    Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101-549, Sec. 101(f), designated existing
provisions as par. (1), struck out ``(1)'', ``(2)'', ``(3)'', and
``(4)'' before ``engage in'', ``support in'', ``license or'', and
``approve, any'', respectively, substituted ``conform to an
implementation plan after it'' for ``conform to a plan after it'',
``conform to an implementation plan approved'' for ``conform to a plan
approved'', and ``conformity to such an implementation plan shall'' for
``conformity to such a plan shall'', inserted ``Conformity to an
implementation plan means--'' followed immediately by subpars. (A) and

(B) and closing provisions relating to determination of conformity being
based on recent estimates of emissions and the determination of such
estimates, and added pars. (2) to (4).

    1977--Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 95-190 inserted ``national'' before
``primary''.

Reference Document for Informational Purposes Only