[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 158 (Thursday, August 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46692-46693]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17784]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2879-012]

Green Mountain Power Corporation; Notice of Availability of Draft
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the application for license for the Bolton Falls Hydroelectric
Project, located on the Winooski River in Washington County, Vermont,
and has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the
project. No federal land is occupied by project works or located within
the project boundary.
    The DEA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental
impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with
appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a
major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the
human environment.
    The Commission provides all interested persons with an opportunity
to view and/or print the EA via the internet through the Commission's
Home Page (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. At this time, the Commission has
suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the
proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the

Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on March
13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eSubscription.aspx to be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this
notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/Quick Comment.aspx. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. In lieu
of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via
the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier
must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2879-012.
    Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to Michael Tust
at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 13, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17784 Filed 8-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51625-51626]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24152]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR18-3-000]

Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order; BridgeTex Pipeline
Company, LLC

    Take notice that on October 30, 2017, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2016), BridgeTex Pipeline
Company, LLC (BridgeTex), filed a petition for a declaratory order
seeking approval of expansion of BridgeTex pipeline systems overall
tariff rate structure and terms of service, for transportation of crude
oil and condensate from new origin in Midland, Texas to Houston, Texas
(to be known as the BridgeTex II Expansion Project), as more fully
explained in the petition.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and

interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the
Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any
FERC Online service, please email [email protected], or call
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on November 21, 2017.

    Dated: November 1, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-24152 Filed 11-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 181)]
[Notices]
[Page 57309-57310]
[DOCID:fr20se10-87]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62912; File No. SR-CTA/CQ-2010-03]

Consolidated Tape Association; Notice of Filing and Immediate
Effectiveness of the Sixteenth Substantive Amendment to the Second
Restatement of the Consolidated Tape Association Plan and Twelfth
Substantive Amendment to the Restated Consolidated Quotation Plan

September 14, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 27, 2010, the Consolidated Tape Association (``CTA'') Plan
and Consolidated Quotation (``CQ'') Plan participants
(``Participants'') \3\ filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') a proposal to amend the Second Restatement
of the CTA Plan and Restated CQ Plan (collectively, the ``Plans'').\4\
The proposal represents the sixteenth substantive amendment to the CTA
Plan (``Sixteenth Amendment to the CTA Plan'') and the twelfth
substantive amendment to the CQ Plan (``Twelfth Amendment to the

CQ Plan''), and reflects changes unanimously adopted by the
Participants. The Sixteenth Amendment to the CTA Plan and the Twelfth
Amendment to the CQ Plan (``Amendments'') propose to add EDGA Exchange,
Inc. and EDGX Exchange, Inc. to the Plans. The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments from interested persons on the proposed
Amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ Each participant executed the proposed amendment. The
Participants are: BATS Exchange, Inc.; Chicago Board Options
Exchange, Incorporated; Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.; Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.; International Securities
Exchange LLC; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; The NASDAQ
Stock Market LLC; National Stock Exchange, Inc.; New York Stock
Exchange LLC; NYSE Amex, Inc.; and NYSE Arca, Inc.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 10787 (May 10,
1974), 39 FR 17799 (May 20, 1974) (declaring the CTA Plan
effective); 15009 (July 28, 1978), 43 FR 34851 (August 7, 1978)
(temporarily authorizing the CQ Plan); and 16518 (January 22, 1980),
45 FR 6521 (January 28, 1980) (permanently authorizing the CQ Plan).
The most recent restatement of both Plans was in 1995. The CTA Plan,
pursuant to which markets collect and disseminate last sale price
information for non-NASDAQ listed securities, is a ``transaction
reporting plan'' under Rule 601 under the Act, 17 CFR 242.601, and a
``national market system plan'' under Rule 608 under the Act, 17 CFR
242.608. The CQ Plan, pursuant to which markets collect and
disseminate bid/ask quotation information for listed securities, is
also a ``national market system plan'' under Rule 608 under the Act,
17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Rule 608(a)

A. Purpose of the Amendments

    The amendment proposes to add EDGA Exchange, Inc. and EDGX
Exchange, Inc. as new Participants to each Plan.

B. Governing or Constituent Documents

    Not applicable.

C. Implementation of the Amendments

    Because the Amendments constitute ``Ministerial Amendments'' under
both clause (1) of Section IV(b) of the CTA Plan and clause (1) of
Section IV(c) of the CQ Plan, the Chairman of the CTA Plan and the CQ
Plan's Operating Committee may submit these amendments to the
Commission on behalf of the Participants in the CTA Plan and the CQ
Plan. Because the Participants designate the amendments as concerned
solely with the administration of the Plans, the amendments become
effective upon filing with the Commission.

D. Development and Implementation Phases

    Not applicable.

E. Analysis of Impact on Competition

    The proposed amendment does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Exchange Act. The Participants do not believe that the proposed
plan amendment introduces terms that are unreasonably discriminatory
for the purposes of Section 11A(c)(1)(D) of the Exchange Act.

F. Written Understanding or Agreements relating to Interpretation of,
or Participation in, Plan

    Not applicable.

G. Approval by Sponsors in Accordance with Plan

    See Item I(C) above.

H. Description of Operation of Facility Contemplated by the Proposed
Amendment

    Not applicable.

I. Terms and Conditions of Access

    See Item I(A) above.

J. Method of Determination and Imposition, and Amount of, Fees and
Charges

    See Item I(A) above.

K. Method and Frequency of Processor Evaluation

    Not applicable.

L. Dispute Resolution

    Not applicable.

II. Rule 601(a) (Solely in its Application to the Amendments to the CTA
Plan)

A. Reporting Requirements

    Not applicable.

B. Manner of Collecting, Processing, Sequencing, Making Available and
Disseminating Last Sale Information

    Not applicable.

C. Manner of Consolidation

    Not applicable.

D. Standards and Methods Ensuring Promptness, Accuracy and Completeness
of Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

E. Rules and Procedures Addressed to Fraudulent or Manipulative
Dissemination

    Not applicable.

F. Terms of Access to Transaction Reports

    Not applicable.

G. Identification of Marketplace of Execution

    Not Applicable.

III. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2010-03 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2010-03. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the Amendments that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
Amendments between the Commission and any person, other than those that
may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5
U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Copies of the Amendments also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of the CTA. All comments received will
be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CTA/CQ-2010-03 and should be submitted
on or before October 12, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23360 Filed 9-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24108-24110]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11193]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0750; FRL-9976-84]

Registration Review Proposed Interim Decisions for Several
Pesticides; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's proposed
interim registration review decisions and opens a 60-day public comment
period on the proposed interim decisions for the following pesticides:
Acibenzolar, Aspergillus flavus, Asulam, Bacillus licheniformus,
Chloroxylenol, Coumaphos, Dried fermentation solids and Dolubles of
Myrothecium verrucaria, EPTC (S-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate), Ethylene,
Fenhexamid, Fludioxonil, Formic acid, Methyl nonyl ketone, N\6\-
Benzyladenine, Niclosamide, Potassium silicate, Propamocarb
hydrochloride, Putrescent whole egg solids, Sodium carbonate, and TFM
(3-trifluoromethyl-4-nitrophenol).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0750 for the specific
pesticide of interest provided in the Table in Unit IV, by one of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For pesticide specific information, contact: The Chemical Review
Manager for the pesticide of interest identified in the Table in Unit
IV.
    For general information on the registration review program,
contact: Dana Friedman, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 347-8827; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the Chemical Review Manager for the pesticide of interest
identified in the Table in Unit IV.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

II. Background

    Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide
registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the
statutory standard for registration, that is, the pesticide can perform
its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human
health or the environment. As part of the registration review process,
the Agency has completed proposed interim

decisions for all pesticides listed in the Table in Unit IV. Through
this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is
based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects
on human health and the environment.

III. Authority

    EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed
in the Table in Unit IV pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural
Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C.
Section 3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the
registrations of pesticides are to be reviewed every 15 years. Under
FIFRA, a pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only
if it meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA
section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). When used in accordance with
widespread and commonly recognized practice, the pesticide product must
perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on
the environment; that is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the
environment, or a human dietary risk from residues that result from the
use of a pesticide in or on food.

IV. What action is the Agency taking?

    Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.58, this notice announces the availability
of EPA's proposed interim registration review decisions for the
pesticides shown in the following table, and opens a 60-day public
comment period on the proposed interim decisions. For fenhexamid,
niclosamide, and TFM, this notice also opens a comment period on the
ecological and human health risk assessments.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Registration review case name and                                                 Chemical review manager and
                number                                Docket ID No.                     contact information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acibenzolar-S-methyl, Case 7031......  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0755......................  Leigh Rimmer,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0553.
Aspergillus flavus, Case 6008........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0281......................  Alex Boukedes,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Asulam, Case 0265....................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0783......................  Caitlin Newcamp,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0325.
Bacillus licheniformus, Case 6014....  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0184......................  Daniel Schoeff,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0143.
Chloroxylenol, Case 3045.............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0010......................  Rachel Ricciardi,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Coumaphos, Case 0018.................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0023......................  Margaret Hathaway,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Dried Fermentation Solids and          EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-053.......................  Cody Kendrick,
 Solubles of Myrothecium verrucaria,                                                [email protected], 703-
 Case 6051.                                                                         347-0468.
EPTC (S-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate),  EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0720......................  Patricia Biggio,
 Case 0064.                                                                         [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0547.
Ethylene, Case 3071..................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0877......................  Chris Pfeifer,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                308-0031.
Fenhexamid, Case 7027................  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0187......................  Susan Bartow,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                603-0065.
Fludioxonil, Case 7017...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-1067......................  Patricia Biggio,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0547.
Formic Acid, Case 6073...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0105......................  Cody Kendrick,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0468.
Methyl Nonyl Ketone, Case 3094.......  EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0125......................  Daniel Schoeff,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                347-0143.
N\6\-Benzyladenine, Case 2040........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0190......................  Alex Boukedes,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Niclosamide, Case 2455...............  EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0137......................  R. David Jones,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                305-6725.
Potassium Silicate, Case 6204........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0329......................  Chris Pfeifer,
                                                                                [email protected], 703-
                                                                                308-0031.
Propamocarb Hydrochloride, Case 3124.  EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0662......................  Christina Scheltema,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Putrescent Whole Egg Solids, Case      EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0726......................  Chris Pfeifer,
 4079.                                                                              [email protected], 703-
                                                                                308-0031.
Sodium Carbonate, Case 4066..........  EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0809......................  SanYvette Williams,
                                                                                [email protected],
<PHONE_NUMBER>.
TFM (3-trifluoromethyl-4-              EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0137......................  R. David Jones,
 nitrophenol), Case 7471.                                                           [email protected], 703-
                                                                                305-6725.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The registration review docket for a pesticide includes earlier
documents related to the registration review case. For example, the
review opened with a Preliminary Work Plan, for public comment. A Final
Work Plan was placed in the docket following public comment on the
Preliminary Work Plan.
    The documents in the dockets describe EPA's rationales for
conducting additional risk assessments for the registration review of
the pesticides included in the table in Unit IV, as well as the
Agency's subsequent risk findings and consideration of possible risk
mitigation measures. These proposed interim registration review
decisions are supported by the rationales included in those documents.
Following public comment, the Agency will issue interim or final
registration review decisions for the pesticides listed in the table in
Unit IV.
    The registration review final rule at 40 CFR 155.58(a) provides for
a minimum 60-day public comment period on all proposed interim
registration review decisions. This comment period is intended to
provide an opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating
any necessary amendments to the proposed interim decision. All comments
should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES, and must be
received by EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will
become part of the docket for the pesticides included in the Table in
Unit IV. Comments received after the close of the comment period will
be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and may provide a ``Response to Comments Memorandum'' in
the docket. The interim registration review decision will explain the
effect that any comments had on the interim decision and provide the
Agency's response to significant comments.

    Background on the registration review program is provided at:
http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: May 14, 2018.
Yu-Ting Guilaran,
Director, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2018-11193 Filed 5-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8578-8579]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03215]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 5867-054]

Alice Falls Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 5867-054.
    c. Date filed: September 29, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Alice Falls Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Alice Falls Hydroelectric Project (Alice Falls
Project or project).
    f. Location: On the Ausable River, in the Town of Chesterfield,
Clinton and Essex Counties, New York. The project does not occupy
federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Jody Smet, Vice President, Regulatory
Affairs, Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC, 7315 Wisconsin Avenue,
Suite 1100W, Bethesda, Maryland, 20814;<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Chris Millard at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email at
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests: 60 days
from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and protests using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-
3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S.
Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. All
filings must clearly identify the project name and docket number on the
first page: Alice Falls Hydroelectric Project (P-5867-054).
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted but is not ready for
environmental analysis.
    l. The project consists of the following existing facilities: (1) A
stone masonry dam, 88 feet long and 63 feet high; (2) a 110-foot-long
rock ledge spillway section adjacent to the dam with 2.5-foot-high, 85-
foot-long pipe-supported flashboards; (3) a reservoir with a surface
area of 4.8 acres with a normal water surface elevation of 350 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; (4) an intake structure; (5)
a divided, 45-foot-long, reinforced concrete penstock; (6) a powerhouse
containing two turbine-generator units of 1.5 megawatts (MW) and 0.6
MW; (7) a substation; (8) a 745-foot-long, 5-kilovolt (kV) buried
generator lead from the powerhouse to the substation and a 700-foot-
long, 46-kV buried transmission line from the substation to the
interconnection with the grid; and (9) appurtenant facilities.
    The Alice Falls Project is operated in a run-of-river mode with an
average annual generation of 4,021 megawatt-hours.
    Alice Falls Hydro, LLC proposes to continue to operate the project
in a run-of-river mode with modifications to the flow and operating
schedule of the existing fish bypass facility and modifications to
aesthetic flows over Alice Falls.
    m. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested individuals an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (www.ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to
the Commission's Public Access Room due to the proclamation declaring a
National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19),
issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC
at [email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate
action to take, the Commission will consider all protests filed, but
only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any protests
or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
deadline date for the particular application.

    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE;'' (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application.
    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as
appropriate.

Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--April 2022
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--June 2022
Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary)--July 2022
Issue Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis--July 2022

    Dated: February 9, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03215 Filed 2-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 235 (Friday, December 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70368-70369]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26649]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0740; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-15]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace and Establishment of Class E;
Greenville and Terrell, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace at Greenville, TX, and
establishes Class E airspace at Terrell, TX. This action is the result
of airspace reviews due to the decommissioning of the Caddo Mills non-
directional beacon (NDB). The geographic coordinates of Caddo Mills
Municipal Airport, Caddo Mill, TX, are also being updated to coincide
with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, March 24, 2022. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email:
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the
authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103.
Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to
assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft
and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it amends the Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface at Caddo Mills Municipal Airport, Caddo
Mills, TX, contained within the Greenville, TX, airspace legal
description, and establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface at Terrell Municipal Airport, Terrell, TX, to
support instrument flight rule operations at these airports.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 50862; September 13, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0740
to amend the Class E airspace at Greenville, TX, and establish Class E
airspace at Terrell, TX. Interested parties were invited to participate
in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the
proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71:
    Amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface to within a 6.4-mile (decreased from a 6.5-mile) radius of
Caddo Mills Municipal Airport, Caddo Mills, TX, contained within the
Greenville, TX, airspace legal description; removes the Caddo Mills RBN
and associated extension from the Greenville, TX, airspace legal
description; removes Terrell Municipal Airport and the associate
airspace from the Greenville, TX, airspace legal description as the
airspace no longer adjoins and separate airspace is being established
for Terrell, TX; removes the city associated with Majors Airport,
Greenville, TX, to comply with updates to FAA Order 7400.2N, Procedures
for Handling Airspace Matters; updates the geographic coordinates of
the Caddo Mills Municipal Airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database; and removes the exclusionary language as it is
no longer required;
    And establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Terrell Municipal
Airport, Terrell, TX.
    These actions are the result of airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the Caddo Mills NDB which provided guidance to
instrument procedures at these airports.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (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); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Greenville, TX [Amended]

Majors Airport, TX
    (Lat. 33[deg]04'04'' N, long. 96[deg]03'55'' W)
Caddo Mills Municipal Airport, TX
    (Lat. 33[deg]02'10'' N, long. 96[deg]14'35'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.8-mile radius of Majors Airport; and within a 6.4-mile
radius of the Caddo Mills Municipal Airport.
* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Terrell, TX [Established]

Terrell Municipal Airport, TX
    (Lat. 32[deg]42'31'' N, long. 96[deg]16'02'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.5-mile radius of Terrell Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December 6, 2021.
Steven T. Phillips,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-26649 Filed 12-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 51 (Friday, March 15, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16449-16452]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06068]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0113; FRL-9790-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Prevention of Significant Deterioration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to disapprove a narrow portion of a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of West
Virginia on August 31, 2011. EPA is proposing this action because a
narrow portion of the submittal does not satisfy the Federal
requirement for the inclusion of condensable emissions of particulate
matter (condensables) within the definition of ``regulated new source
review (NSR) pollutant.'' Additionally, because West Virginia's August
31, 2011 SIP revision does not adequately account for condensable
emissions within the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant,'' EPA is
also proposing to disapprove specific Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) portions of related infrastructure submissions
required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) to implement, maintain, and enforce
the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
and the 2008 lead and ozone

NAAQS. This action is being taken under the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2013-0113 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0113, Kathleen Cox, Associate Director,
Office of Permits and Air Toxics, Mailcode 3AP10, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2013-0113. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Gordon,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Federal Definition of ``Regulated NSR Pollutant''

    On May 16, 2008, EPA promulgated a rule to implement the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, including changes to the NSR program (the NSR
PM2.5 Rule). See 73 FR 28321. The 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule revised the NSR program requirements to establish the framework
for implementing preconstruction permit review for the PM2.5
NAAQS in both attainment and nonattainment areas. Among other things,
the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule required states to account for
condensables in emissions of particulate matter (PM), PM less than or
equal to ten micrometers in diameter (PM10), and
PM2.5 no later than January 1, 2011. In an October 25, 2012
final rule (77 FR 65107), EPA clarified that condensable PM should be
included as part of the emissions measurements only for regulation of
PM2.5 and PM10. The final rule removed the
inadvertent requirement in the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule that
measurements of condensable PM be included as part of the measurement
and regulation of PM.

B. U.S. Court of Appeals' Decision in Natural Resources Defense Council
v. EPA

    On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals, in Natural Resources
Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08-1250, 2013 WL 45653 (D.C. Cir., filed
July 15, 2008) (consolidated with 09-1102, 11-1430), issued a judgment
that remanded EPA's 2007 and 2008 rules implementing the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. The Court ordered the EPA to ``repromulgate
these rules pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.'' Id.
at *8. Subpart 4 of Part D, Title 1 of the CAA establishes additional
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas.
    The 2008 implementation rule addressed by the court decision,
``Implementation of New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),'' 73 FR 28321 (May
16, 2008), promulgated NSR requirements for implementation of
PM2.5 in both nonattainment areas (nonattainment NSR) and
attainment/unclassifiable areas (PSD). As the requirements of Subpart 4
only pertain to nonattainment areas, EPA does not consider the portions
of the 2008 rule that address requirements for PM2.5
attainment and unclassifiable areas to be affected by the Court's
opinion. Moreover, EPA does not anticipate the need to revise any PSD
requirements promulgated in the 2008 rule in order to comply with the
Court's decision. Accordingly, EPA's narrow disapproval of West
Virginia's infrastructure SIP as to elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J)
with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008
implementation rule does not conflict with the Court's opinion.
    The Court's decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule also does not
affect EPA's current action on the related infrastructure submittals.
EPA interprets the Act to exclude nonattainment area requirements,
including requirements associated with a nonattainment NSR program,
from infrastructure SIP submissions due three years after adoption or
revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are typically referred to
as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by
the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part
D, extending as far as 10 years following designations for some
elements.

C. West Virginia's August 2011 SIP Submission

    On August 31, 2011, the State of West Virginia through the West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) submitted a
formal revision to its SIP (the August 2011 SIP submission). The August
2011 SIP submission consisted of amendments to the PSD permitting
regulations under West Virginia State Rule 45CSR14. On July 31, 2012
(77 FR 45302), EPA proposed full approval of West Virginia's August
2011 SIP submission, as well as the PSD portions of other related
infrastructure submissions required by the CAA which are

necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 PM2.5
and ozone NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 lead and
ozone NAAQS. During the public comment period, EPA received adverse
comment on West Virginia State Rule 45CSR14 and the extent to which
condensables were not included in the rule. The commenter stated that
West Virginia's PSD regulations did not properly account for
condensable emissions of PM. The inclusion of condensable emissions of
PM is required by the Federal counterpart language in 40 CFR 52.21 and
51.166 and the NSR PM2.5 Rule.
    In light of this comment, in an October 17, 2012 final rule (77 FR
63736), EPA granted full approval of West Virginia's August 2011 SIP
submission, as well as the PSD portions of other related infrastructure
SIP submissions required by the CAA, with the exception of the narrow
issue of the requirement to include condensables in the definition of
``regulated NSR pollutant.'' In the October 17, 2012 final rule, EPA
stated that West Virginia State Rule 45CSR14 would be reviewed to
determine the extent to which condensables were addressed in the August
2011 SIP submission and that this issue would be addressed in a
separate rulemaking action. See 77 FR 63736.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    As previously stated, on October 17, 2012, EPA granted full
approval to the August 2011 SIP submission and PSD portions of other
related infrastructure elements required by the CAA, with the exception
of the narrow issue of the requirement to include condensables in the
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' Subsequently, EPA has
reviewed the remaining portion of the West Virginia August 2011 SIP
submission regarding the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' and
is proposing to determine that condensable emissions are omitted from
the 45CSR14 definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' Therefore, this
remaining portion of the August 2011 SIP submission does not satisfy
the requirements of the corresponding Federal definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant'' and the NSR PM2.5 Rule. EPA is therefore
proposing to disapprove this remaining narrow portion of the August
2011 SIP submission. Also, because condensable emissions are a
requirement for a PSD program by CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II)
and (J), EPA is proposing to disapprove the narrow part of the PSD
portions related to the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' in
other related West Virginia infrastructure SIP submissions required by
the CAA which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the
1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
and the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to disapprove the narrow portion of West
Virginia's August 2011 SIP submission related to the failure to include
condensables in the ``regulated NSR pollutant'' definition on which we
took no action in the October 17, 2012 final rule. See 77 FR 63736.
    Specifically, EPA is proposing to disapprove a narrow portion of
West Virginia's August 2011 SIP submission because it does not satisfy
the requirement that PM2.5 and PM10 emissions
shall include gaseous emissions from a source or activity which
condense to form PM at ambient temperatures. Because these grounds for
disapproval are narrow and extend only to the lack of condensable
emissions within the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant,'' this
proposal does not alter EPA's October 17, 2012 approval of the
remaining portions of West Virginia's August 2011 SIP submittal.
    Additionally, EPA is proposing to disapprove specific portions of
West Virginia's infrastructure SIP submissions dated December 3, 2007,
December 11, 2007, April 3, 2008, October 1, 2009, October 26, 2011,
and February 17, 2012 (collectively, the West Virginia Infrastructure
SIP Submissions) which address certain obligations set forth at CAA
sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and (J) relating to the West Virginia
PSD permit program. In the October 17, 2012 final rule, EPA granted
full approval of the PSD portions of the West Virginia infrastructure
SIP submissions, with the exception of the narrow issue of the
requirement to include condensables in the definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant.'' Because West Virginia's definition of ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' in 45CSR14 does not address condensables, EPA is proposing
to determine that West Virginia's infrastructure SIP submissions do not
meet certain statutory and regulatory obligations relating to a PSD
permit program set forth at CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) and
(J) for the narrow issue of condensables as set forth in the table
below. EPA is proposing to disapprove the narrow portion of the October
26, 2011 and February 17, 2012 infrastructure SIP submissions from West
Virginia because West Virginia has not met its obligations relating to
the PSD permit program pursuant to CAA section 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J) due to the failure to include condensables in the
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' EPA is also proposing to
disapprove the narrow portion of the December 3, 2007, December 11,
2007, April 3, 2008, and October 1, 2009 infrastructure SIP submissions
from West Virginia because West Virginia has not met its obligations
relating to the PSD permit program pursuant to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS and
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS due to the failure to include
condensables in the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' Specific
infrastructure elements and submittal dates are listed in the following
table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Infrastructure element(s)  proposed to be
          Submittal(s) dated                      NAAQS                      disapproved in this action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 11, 2007.....................  1997 PM2.5...............  110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
April 3, 2008.
December 3, 2007......................  1997 ozone...............  110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
December 11, 2007.
October 1, 2009.......................  2006 PM2.5...............  110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
October 26, 2011......................  2008 lead................  110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), (C), and (J).
February 17, 2012.....................  2008 ozone...............  110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), (C), and (J).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under CAA section 179(a), final disapproval of a submission that
addresses a requirement of a Part D Plan (CAA sections 171-193), or is
required in response to a finding of substantial inadequacy as
described in CAA section 110(k)(5) starts a sanction clock. The
specific provisions in the submissions we are proposing to disapprove,
due to

the omission of condensables in the definition of ``regulated NSR
pollutant,'' were not submitted by West Virginia to meet either of
those requirements. Therefore, if EPA takes final action to disapprove
these submissions, no sanctions under CAA section 179 will be
triggered.
    The full or partial disapproval of a SIP revision triggers the
requirement under CAA section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than two years from the date of the
disapproval unless the State corrects the deficiency, and the
Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the
Administrator promulgates such FIP. From discussions with the State,
EPA anticipates that WVDEP will make a submission rectifying the
deficiency regarding condensables. Further, EPA anticipates acting on
WVDEP's submissions within the two year time frame prior to our FIP
obligation on this very narrow issue. In the interim, EPA expects WVDEP
to account for condensable emissions of PM consistent with Federal
regulations for PSD permitting. EPA is soliciting public comments only
on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will be
considered before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this case, EPA is
proposing to disapprove a narrow portion of the West Virginia August
2011 SIP submittal and PSD portions of other related infrastructure
submissions required by the CAA that do not meet Federal requirements.
This proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the proposed rule to disapprove a narrow provision in the
August 2011 SIP submission and to disapprove narrow portions related to
the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' in portions of the West
Virginia infrastructure SIP submissions is not approved to apply in
Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that this action
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 6, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2013-06068 Filed 3-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 21117]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07671]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-1566-000]

Guernsey Power Station LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Guernsey Power Station LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 25, 2022.
    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 may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (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. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 5, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-07671 Filed 4-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45456-45458]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16265]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-89376; File No. SR-NYSEAMER-2020-57]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE American LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the
NYSE American Options Fee Schedule

July 22, 2020.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on July 16, 2020 NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to modify its rules to conform the
terminology in the NYSE American Options Fee Schedule (``Fee
Schedule'') to Rule 960.1NY (Requirements for Penny Interval Program),
which permits quoting in penny increments for certain option classes on
a permanent basis. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to modify its rules to conform the
terminology in the Fee Schedule to Rule 960.1NY (Requirements for Penny
Interval Program), which permits quoting in penny increments for
certain option classes on a permanent basis. In sum, the Exchange
proposes to define ``Penny'' and ``Non-Penny'' options, with cross-
reference to Rule 960.1NY and to eliminate from the Fee Schedule
obsolete references to the ``Pilot'' program. This filing is technical
in nature as it merely updates the nomenclature regarding transactions
in Penny and Non-Penny options and does not modify any associated fees
or credits for such transactions.
Background
    On April 1, 2020, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') approved Amendment No. 5 to the Plan for the Purpose of
Developing and Implementing Procedures Designed to Facilitate the
Listing and Trading of Standardized Options to Adopt a Penny Interval
Program (``Amendment No. 5'').\4\ The Exchange then filed to conform
its rules--including Rule 960.1NY--to Amendment No. 5, which rules
(like Amendment No. 5) became operative July 1, 2020 (the ``Penny
Program'').\5\ The Penny Pilot, which was adopted in

2007 and extended and expanded over the years, expired by its own terms
on June 30, 2020.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88532 (April 1,
2020), 85 FR 19545 (April 7, 2020) (File No 4-443).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 88947 (May 26,
2020), 85 FR 33249 (June 1, 2020) (NYSEAMER-2020-41) (immediately
effective filing that is operative on July 1, 2020, which outlines
the history of the Penny Pilot program and details the process for
the Penny Interval Program).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 87633 (November 26,
2019) 84 FR 66251 (December 3, 2019) (NYSEAMER-2019-51).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Changes
    The Exchange proposes to modify the terminology in the Fee Schedule
to align with the terminology in the Penny Program by amending the
definitions for ``Penny'' and ``Non-Penny'' options and eliminating all
references to ``Pilot.'' \7\ As proposed, a ```Penny' option refers to
option classes that participate in the Penny Interval Program, as
described in Rule 960.1NY'' and a ```Non-Penny' option refers to option
classes that do not participate in the Penny Interval Program, as
described in Rule 960.1NY.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See generally proposed Fee Schedule.
    \8\ See proposed Fee Schedule, KEY TERMS and DEFINITIONS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to eliminate
from the Fee Schedule all references to ``Pilot'' as that term relates
to the ``Penny Pilot'' because such references became obsolete as of
July 1, 2020.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See proposed Fee Schedule, Sections I.G and I.H (deleting
reference to ``Pilot'' throughout).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For consistency in usage and terminology, the Exchange proposes to
modify references to ``Non-Penny'' in existing text to capitalize and
hyphenate the term \10\ and, in note 1 to the Complex CUBE Auction
table in Section I.G. In addition, the Exchange proposes to remove the
terms ``Pilot'' and ``Pilot issues'' from the Complex CUBE Auction
table in Section I.G. The Exchanges believes these changes would add
clarity, transparency and internal consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See id. The Exchange also proposes the non-substantive
change of adding a period to the last sentence of note 1 to the
Complex CUBE Auction table in Section I.G. See proposed Fee
Schedule, Sections I.G.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\11\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\
in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change, which conforms the
terminology in the Fee Schedule to Rule 960.1NY, promotes just and
equitable principles of trade because it does not alter any existing
fees or credits but instead is technical in nature insofar as it amends
the definitions for ``Penny'' and ``Non-Penny'' options, consistent
with Exchange rules, and removes references to the now-expired (Penny)
``Pilot.'' This proposed change would provide internal consistency
within Exchange rules and operate to protect investors and the
investing public by making the Exchange rules easier to navigate and
comprehend. The proposed change would render the rules more accurate
and reduce potential investor confusion, thus helping to facilitate the
maintenance of a fair and orderly market.
    Regarding the proposed technical changes (see supra notes 9 and
10), the Exchange believes the changes would add clarity and
transparency to the Fee Schedule making it easier to navigate and
comprehend to the benefit of all market participants.

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

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act, the Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. The proposal, which modifies the terminology in
the Fee Schedule to align with the terminology in the Exchange's rules,
is not a competitive filing. Instead, the proposed change is meant to
add clarity and transparency to the Fee Schedule to the benefit of all
market participants that trade on the Exchange. Given the technical
nature of this filing, the Exchange anticipates that other options
exchanges will similarly update their fee schedules (as needed) to
align with any rule(s) adopted in conformance with Amendment No. 5.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \13\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\14\
Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for
30 days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \16\ thereunder. The
Exchange has proposed to implement the proposed rule change immediately
upon filing and has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative
delay for this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because it will allow the Exchange to modify the terminology in its fee
schedule to conform it to the Penny Program, which is currently
described in NYSE American Rule 960.1NY. The proposed rule change does
not raise any novel issues and is technical in nature as it is designed
to update the language in the Exchange's fee schedule to reflect the
language used throughout the Exchange's rulebook. The Commission
believes that the proposed rule change proposes ministerial changes
which are designed to alleviate the potential for investor confusion.
Accordingly, the Commission designates the proposed rule change as
operative upon filing.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-57 on the subject line

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-57. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAMER-2020-57 and should be submitted
on or before August 18, 2020.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-16265 Filed 7-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 85 (Thursday, May 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18919-18921]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0087]

Pipeline Safety: Potential for Damage to Pipeline Facilities
Caused by Earth Movement and Other Geological Hazards

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory bulletin.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing this advisory bulletin to remind owners and
operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines of the potential for
damage to pipeline facilities caused by earth movement from both
landslides and subsidence in variable, steep, and rugged terrain and
for varied geological conditions. These conditions can pose a threat to
the integrity of pipeline facilities if those threats are not
identified and mitigated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Operators of pipelines subject to
regulation by PHMSA should contact the appropriate PHMSA Region Office.
The PHMSA Region Offices and their contact information are as follows:

 Eastern Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia
 Southern Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and Tennessee
 Central Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin
 Southwest Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas
 Western Region:<PHONE_NUMBER>
    Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana,
Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming

    Intrastate pipeline operators should contact the appropriate state
pipeline safety authority. A list of state pipeline safety authorities
is available at http://www.napsr.org/state-program-managers.html.
    For general information about this notice contact Mike Yazemboski,
Project Manager, PHMSA Eastern Region, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The purpose of this advisory bulletin is to remind owners and
operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines, particularly those
with facilities located in inland areas, about the serious safety-
related issues that can result from earth movement and other geologic
hazards.
    Natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines are required to be
designed to withstand external loads including those that may be
imposed by geological forces. Specifically, natural gas pipelines must
be designed in accordance with 49 CFR 192.103 and hazardous liquid
pipelines must be designed in accordance with Sec.  195.110. To comply
with these regulations, the design of new pipelines, including repairs
or replacement, must consider load that may be imposed by geological
forces.
    Once operational, Sec.  192.317(a) of the pipeline safety
regulations for natural gas pipelines states that ``[t]he operator must
take all practicable steps to protect each transmission line or main
from washouts, floods, unstable soil, landslides, or other hazards that
may cause the pipeline to move or to sustain abnormal loads. In
addition, the operator must take all practicable steps to protect
offshore pipelines from damage by mud slides, water currents,
hurricanes, ship anchors, and fishing operations.'' This advisory
bulletin addresses those protective requirements associated with damage
caused by geological factors.
    In addition, Sec.  192.705 requires operators of gas transmission
lines to have a patrol program to observe surface conditions on and
adjacent to the transmission line right-of-way for indications of
leaks, construction activity, and other factors affecting safety and
operation and the frequency of patrols must be based upon the size of
the line, operating pressures, class locations, terrain, seasonal
weather conditions, and other relevant factors. One of the primary
reasons for this patrol requirement is to monitor geological movement,
both slowly occurring or acute changes, which may affect the current or
future safe operation of the pipeline.
    Furthermore, Sec.  192.613(a) states that ``[e]ach operator shall
have a procedure for continuing surveillance of its facilities to
determine and take appropriate action concerning changes in class
location, failures, leakage history, corrosion, substantial changes in
cathodic protection requirements, and other unusual operating and
maintenance conditions.'' Section 192.613(b) further states that ``[i]f
a segment of pipeline is determined to be in unsatisfactory condition
but no immediate hazard exists, the operator shall initiate a program
to recondition or phase out the segment involved, or, if the segment
cannot be reconditioned or phased out, reduce the maximum allowable
operating pressure in accordance with Sec.  192.619(a) and (b).''
    Section 195.401(b)(1) of the pipeline safety regulations for
hazardous liquid pipelines states that ``[w]henever an operator
discovers any condition that could adversely affect the safe operation
of its pipeline system, it must correct the condition within a
reasonable time. However, if the condition is of such a nature that it
presents an immediate hazard to persons or property, the operator may
not operate the affected part of the system until it has corrected the
unsafe condition.'' Section 195.401(b)(2) further states that ``[w]hen
an operator discovers a condition on a pipeline covered under [the
integrity management requirements in] Sec.  195.452, the operator must
correct the condition as prescribed in Sec.  195.452(h).'' Land
movement, severe flooding, river scour, and river channel migration are
the types of unusual operating conditions that can adversely affect the
safe operation of a pipeline and require corrective action under
Sec. Sec.  192.613(a) and 195.401(b). Additional guidance for
identifying risk factors and mitigating natural force hazards on
pipeline segments, that could affect high consequence areas, are
outlined in Appendix C, section B, to Part 195.
    Sections 192.935 and 195.452(i) require an operator to take
additional preventative and mitigative measures to prevent a pipeline
failure and to mitigate the consequences of a pipeline failure that
could affect a high consequence area. An operator must base the
additional measures on the

threats the operator has identified for each pipeline segment. If an
operator determines there is a threat to the pipeline, such as outside
force damage (e.g., earth movement, floods), the operator must take
steps to prevent a failure and to minimize the consequences of a
failure under these regulations.
    PHMSA is aware of recent earth movement and other geological-
related incidents/accidents and safety-related conditions throughout
the county, particularly in the eastern portion of the United States.
Seven of the more notable events are briefly described below:
     On October 21, 2016, a pipeline release of over 1,238
barrels of gasoline spilled into the Loyalsock Creek in Lycoming
County, Pennsylvania. The release was caused by extreme localized
flooding and soil erosion.
     On December 5, 2016, approximately 12,615 barrels of crude
oil was released into Ash Coulee Creek in Billings County, North
Dakota. The metallurgical and root cause failure analysis indicated the
failure was caused by compressive and bending forces due to a landslide
impacting the pipeline. The landslide was the result of excessive
moisture within the hillside creating unstable soil conditions.
     On April 30, 2018, a pipeline failure occurred in a remote
mountainous region of Marshall County, West Virginia resulting in the
release of 2,658 barrels of propane. The failure and subsequent release
was caused by lateral movement of the 8-inch intrastate pipeline due to
earth movement along the right-of-way.
     On June 7, 2018, a rupture occurred on a 36-inch pipeline
located in a rural, mountainous area near Moundsville, West Virginia,
resulting in the release of approximately 165,000 MCF of natural gas.
The failed sections of the pipeline were sent to a metallurgical
laboratory to determine the probable cause behind the failure of the
pipeline. According to the analysis, the cause of the rupture was due
to earth movement on the right-of-way due to a single overload event.
Overloading of the pipeline likely resulted from a series of lateral
displacements with accompanying bending.
     On January 9, 2018, a failure occurred on a 22-inch
transmission pipeline in Montecito California. The incident resulted in
a fire and explosion and the release of an estimated 12,000 MFC of
natural gas within a Class 3 location.\1\ It is believed that heavy
rains and localized flooding contributed to the incident. Automated
safety equipment designed to stop the flow of gas to the effected
segment activated to shut off gas flow to the damaged segment of
pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 49 CFR 192.5(b)(3) (defining Class 3 locations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     On January 31, 2018, a portion of a pipeline experienced
an in-service rupture near the city of Summerfield, Ohio. The rupture
of the 24-inch interstate pipeline resulted in the release of
approximately 23,500 MCF of natural gas in a rural forested area. A
root cause analysis concluded that the girth weld failure was caused by
axial stress due to movement of the pipe that exceeded the cross-
sectional tensile strength of the net section weld zone surrounding the
crack initiation location. This determination is supported by
metallurgical analysis, strain capacity evaluation and geotechnical
findings.
     On January 29, 2019, a pipeline ruptured near the town of
Lumberport in Harrison County, West Virginia. The rupture was located
at a girth weld of an elbow on the 12-inch interstate pipeline. The
root cause investigation concluded that a landslide about 150 yards
from the rupture moved the pipeline approximately 10 feet from its
original location causing excessive stress on the pipe resulting in the
rupture.

II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB-2019-02)

    To: Owners and Operators of Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Systems.
    Subject: Potential Damage to Pipeline Facilities Caused by External
Loads Imposed by Earth Movement and Other Geologic Hazards on and
Adjacent to Pipeline Right-of-Way Corridors.
    Advisory: All owners and operators of gas and hazardous liquid
pipelines are reminded that earth movement, particularly in variable,
steep, and rugged terrain and with varied geological subsurface
conditions, can pose a threat to the integrity of a pipeline if those
threats are not mitigated. Pipeline operators should consider taking
the following actions to ensure pipeline safety:
    1. Identify areas surrounding the pipeline that may be prone to
large earth movement, including but not limited to slope instability,
subsidence, frost heave, soil settlement, erosion, earthquakes, and
other dynamic geologic conditions that may pose a safety risk.
    2. Utilize geotechnical engineers during the design, construction,
and ongoing operations of a pipeline system to ensure that sufficient
information is available to avoid or minimize the impact of earth
movement on the integrity of the pipeline system. At a minimum, this
should include soil strength characteristics, ground and surface water
conditions, propensity for erosion or scour of underlying soils, and
the propensity of earthquakes or frost heave.
    3. Develop design, construction, and monitoring plans and
procedures for each identified location, based on the site-specific
hazards identified. When constructing new pipelines, develop and
implement procedures for pipe and girth weld designs to increase their
effectiveness for taking loads, either stresses or strains, exerted
from pipe movement in areas where geological subsurface conditions and
movement are a hazard to the pipeline integrity.
    4. Monitoring plans may include:
     Ensuring during construction of new pipelines that
excavators do not steepen, load (including changing the groundwater
levels) or undercut slopes which may cause excessive ground movement
during construction or after operations commence.
     Conducting periodic visits and site inspections; increased
patrolling may be necessary due to potential hazards identified and
existing/pending weather conditions. Right-of-way patrol staff must be
trained on how to detect and report to appropriate staff the conditions
that may lead to or exhibit ground movement.
     Identifying geodetic monitoring points (i.e., survey bench
marks) to track potential ground movement;
     Installing slope inclinometers to track ground movement at
depth which may otherwise not be detectable during ROW patrols;
     Installing standpipe piezometers to track changes in
groundwater conditions that may affect slope stability;
     Evaluating the accumulation of strain in the pipeline by
installing strain gauges on the pipeline.
     Conducting stress/strain analysis utilizing in-line
inspection tools equipped with Inertia Mapping Unit technology and High
Resolution Deformation in-line inspection for pipe bending and denting
from movement.
     Utilizing aerial mapping light detection and ranging or
other technology to track changes in ground conditions.
    5. Develop mitigation measures to remediate the identified
locations.
    6. Mitigation measures should be based on site-specific conditions
and may include:
     Re-routing the pipeline right-of-way prior to construction
to avoid areas prone to large ground movement such as unstable slope
areas, earthquake fault zones, permafrost movement, or scour.

     Utilize properly designed horizontal directional drilling
(HDD) to go below areas of potential land movement.
     Installation of drainage measures in the trench to
mitigate subsurface flows and enhance surface water draining at the
site including streams, creeks, runs, gullies or other sources of
surface run-off that may be contributing surface water to the site or
changing groundwater levels that may exacerbate earth movement.
     Reducing the steepness of potentially unstable slopes,
including installing retaining walls, soldier piles, sheet piles, wire
mesh systems, mechanically stabilized earth systems and other
mechanical structures.
     Installing trench breakers and slope breakers to mitigate
trench seepage and divert trench flows along the surface to safe
discharge points off the site or right-of-way.
     Building retaining walls and/or installing steel piling or
concrete caissons to stabilize steep slope areas as long as the
corrosion control systems are not compromised.
     Reducing the loading on the site by removing and/or
reducing the excess backfill materials to off-site locations. Soil
placement should be carefully planned to avoid triggering earth
movement in other locations.
     Compacting backfill materials at the site to increase
strength, reduce water infiltration, and to achieve optimal moisture
content.
     Drying the soil using special additives such as lime-kiln
dust or cement-kiln to allow the materials to be re-used and worked at
the site. Over-saturated materials may require an extensive amount of
time and space to dry.
     Regrading the pipeline right-of-way to minimize scour and
erosion.
     Bringing the pipeline above ground and placing them on
supports that can accommodate large ground movements, (e.g.,
transitions across earthquake fault zones or unstable slopes, without
putting excessive stress or strain on the pipeline).
     Reducing the operating pressure temporarily or shutting-in
the affected pipeline segment completely.
     Re-routing the pipeline when other appropriate mitigation
measures cannot be effectively implemented to maintain safety.
    If a pipeline has suffered damage or is shut-in as a precautionary
measure due to earth movement or other geologic hazards, the operator
should advise the appropriate PHMSA regional office or state pipeline
safety authority before returning the line to service, increasing its
operating pressure, or otherwise changing its operating status. Per
Sec.  190.239, PHMSA may propose additional safety measures, including
testing of the pipeline, or design changes to address external loads
induced by ground movement, be taken to ensure that the serviceability
of the pipeline has not been impaired or that the condition will not
worsen over time. Furthermore, reporting a safety-related condition as
prescribed in Sec. Sec.  191.23 and 195.55 may also be required.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 29, 2019, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2019-08984 Filed 5-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-60-P