[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44760-44761]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18207]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER07-771-007.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company, Kentucky Utilities
Company.
    Description: Annual Schedule 2 True-Up Filing of Louisville Gas and
Electric Company/Kentucky Utilities Company.
    Filed Date: 9/12/2013.
    Accession Number: 20130912-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-771-008.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company, Kentucky Utilities
Company.
    Description: Annual Schedule 2 True-Up Filing of Louisville Gas and
Electric Company/Kentucky Utilities Company.
    Filed Date: 7/18/14.
    Accession Number: 20140718-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2924-005.
    Applicants: Kleen Energy Systems, LLC.
    Description: Compliance Filing for Electric Tariff to be effective
7/25/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5092.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1913-001.
    Applicants: Oneta Power, LLC.
    Description: Amendment to Tariff Filing to be effective 5/9/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2232-001.
    Applicants: Capital Energy LLC.
    Description: Updated Asset Appendix to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2498-000.
    Applicants: EIF Newark, LLC.
    Description: Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 9/22/
2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2499-000.
    Applicants: Oneta Power, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Succession of Market--Based Rate Tariff to
be effective 7/3/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2500-000.
    Applicants: Newark Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: Market-Based Rate Application to be effective 9/22/
2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2501-000.
    Applicants: EAM Nelson Holding, LLC.
    Description: EAM Nelson Holding, LLC, Reactive Power Rate Schedule
to be effective 9/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2502-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Power, LLC.
    Description: Entergy Power, LLC, Reactive Power Rate Schedule to be
effective 9/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2503-000.
    Applicants: Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company.
    Description: Normal FGE and KCS Service to be effective 7/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/25/14.
    Accession Number: 20140725-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2504-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: CLGIA with Windhub Solar, LLC. to be effective 7/26/
2014.
    Filed Date: 7/25/14.
    Accession Number: 20140725-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-2505-000.
    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company.
    Description: CWIP Modifications to be effective 6/20/2014.
    Filed Date: 7/25/14.

    Accession Number: 20140725-5030.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following land
acquisition reports:

    Docket Numbers: LA14-2-000.
    Applicants: East Coast Power Linden Holdings, L.L.C., Cogen
Technologies Linden Venture, L.P., Birchwood Power Partners, L.P.,
Shady Hills Power Company, L.L.C., EFS Parlin Holdings, LLC, Inland
Empire Energy Center, LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of the GE Companies.
    Filed Date: 7/24/14.
    Accession Number: 20140724-5121.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/14/14.

    Docket Numbers: LA14-2-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy LLC, Bishop Hill Energy LLC, Bishop
Hill Energy III LLC, California Ridge Wind Energy LLC, Forward Energy
LLC, Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Grand Ridge Energy II LLC, Grand Ridge
Energy III LLC, Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC, Grand Ridge Energy V LLC,
Gratiot County Wind LLC, Gratiot County Wind II LLC, Grays Harbor
Energy LLC, Hardee Power Partners Limited, Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC,
Invenergy TN LLC, Judith Gap Energy LLC, Prairie Breeze Wind Energy
LLC, Sheldon Energy LLC, Spring Canyon Energy LLC, Spindle Hill Energy
LLC, Stony Creek Energy LLC, Vantage Wind Energy LLC, Willow Creek
Energy LLC, Wolverine Creek Energy LLC.
    Description: Quarterly Land Acquisition Report of Beech Ridge
Energy LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/25/14.
    Accession Number: 20140725-5025.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/14.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:

    Docket Numbers: QF14-642-000.
    Applicants: CII Methane Management IV, LLC.
    Description: Request for Waiver and Proposed Refund Report of CII
Methane Management IV, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/25/14.
    Accession Number: 20140725-5022.
    Comments Due: None Applicable.

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

    Dated: July 25, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-18207 Filed 7-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 155 (Thursday, August 11, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49708-49710]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20455]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2011-0470, FRL-9450-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Iowa:
Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas Permitting
Authority and Tailoring Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to regulation of Greenhouse Gases
(GHGs) under Iowa's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program. This revision was submitted by the Iowa Department of Natural
Resources (IDNR) to EPA on December 22, 2010. It is intended to align
Iowa's regulations with the ``PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring
Final Rule.'' EPA is proposing to approve the revision because the
Agency has made the preliminary determination that the SIP revision,
already adopted by Iowa as a final effective rule, is in accordance
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA regulations regarding PSD
permitting for GHGs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2011-0470, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Air Planning and Development Branch, Air and Waste
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Larry Gonzalez, Air Planning and
Development Branch, Air and Waste Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas
City, Kansas 66101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2011-0470. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning and Development
Branch, Air and Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the Iowa
SIP, contact Mr. Larry Gonzalez, Air Planning and Development Branch,
Air and Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Mr.
Gonzalez's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?
II. What is the background for the PSD SIP approval proposed by EPA
in today's notice?
III. What is EPA's analysis of Iowa's proposed SIP revision?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA proposing in today's notice?

    On December 22, 2010, IDNR submitted a request to EPA to approve
revisions to the State's SIP and Title V program to incorporate recent
rule amendments adopted by the Iowa Environmental Protection
Commission. These adopted rules became effective in the Iowa
Administrative Code on that date. These amendments establish thresholds
for GHG emissions in Iowa's PSD and Title V regulations at the same
emissions thresholds and in the same

time-frames as those specified by EPA in the ``PSD and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Final Rule'' (75 FR 31514), hereafter referred
to as the ``Tailoring Rule,'' ensuring that smaller GHG sources
emitting less than these thresholds will not be subject to permitting
requirements for GHGs that they emit. The amendments to the SIP clarify
the applicable thresholds in the Iowa SIP, address the flaw discussed
in the ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in
State Implementation Plans Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30,
2010) (the ``PSD SIP Narrowing Rule''), and incorporate state rule
changes adopted at the state level into the Federally-approved SIP. In
today's notice, pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is proposing to
approve these revisions into the Iowa SIP.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA intends to address Iowa's December 22, 2010, request to
approve revisions to the Title V program relating to GHGs in a
subsequent rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What is the background for the PSD SIP approval proposed by EPA in
today's notice?

    This section briefly summarizes EPA's recent GHG-related actions
that provide the background for today's proposed actions. More detailed
discussion of the background is found in the preambles for those
actions. In particular, the background is contained in what we called
the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,\2\ and in the preambles to the actions
cited therein.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources
in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 82536 (December
30, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. GHG-Related Actions

    EPA has recently undertaken a series of actions pertaining to the
regulation of GHGs that, although for the most part distinct from one
another, establish the overall framework for today's proposed action on
the Iowa SIP. Four of these actions include, as they are commonly
called, the ``Endangerment Finding'' and ``Cause or Contribute
Finding,'' which EPA issued in a single final action,\3\ the ``Johnson
Memo Reconsideration,'' \4\ the ``Light-Duty Vehicle Rule,'' \5\ and
the ``Tailoring Rule.'' Taken together and in conjunction with the CAA,
these actions established regulatory requirements for GHGs emitted from
new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines; determined that such
regulations, when they took effect on January 2, 2011, subjected GHGs
emitted from stationary sources to PSD requirements; and limited the
applicability of PSD requirements to GHG sources on a phased-in basis.
EPA took this last action in the Tailoring Rule, which, more
specifically, established appropriate GHG emission thresholds for
determining the applicability of PSD requirements to GHG-emitting
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for
Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.'' 74 FR
66496 (December 15, 2009).
    \4\ ``Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants
Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting Programs.'' 75 FR 17004 (Apr. 2,
2010).
    \5\ ``Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and
Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 25324
(May 7, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PSD is implemented through the SIP system. In December 2010, EPA
promulgated several rules to implement the new GHG PSD SIP program.
Recognizing that some states had approved SIP PSD programs that did not
apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP Call and, for some of these states,
a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP).\6\ Recognizing that other states
had approved SIP PSD programs that do apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so
for sources that emit as little as 100 or 250 tpy of GHG, and that do
not limit PSD applicability to GHGs to the higher thresholds in the
Tailoring Rule, EPA issued the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule. Under that rule,
EPA withdrew its approval of the affected SIPs to the extent those SIPs
covered GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds. EPA
based its action primarily on the ``error correction'' provisions of
CAA section 110(k)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Specifically, by action dated December 13, 2010, EPA
finalized a ``SIP Call'' that would require those states with SIPs
that have approved PSD programs but do not authorize PSD permitting
for GHGs to submit a SIP revision providing such authority. ``Action
To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,'' 75 FR
77698 (December 13, 2010). EPA made findings of failure to submit in
some states which were unable to submit the required SIP revision by
their deadlines, and finalized FIPs for such states. See, e.g.
``Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention
of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plan
Revisions Required for Greenhouse Gases,'' 75 FR 81874 (December 29,
2010); ``Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan,'' 75 FR 82246
(December 30, 2010). Because Iowa's SIP already authorizes Iowa to
regulate GHGs once GHGs became subject to PSD requirements on
January 2, 2011, Iowa is not subject to the SIP Call or FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Iowa's Actions

    On July 20, 2010, Iowa provided a letter to EPA, in accordance with
a request to all states from EPA in the Tailoring Rule, with
confirmation that the State of Iowa has the authority to regulate GHGs
in its PSD program. The letter also confirmed Iowa's intent to amend
its air quality rules for the PSD program for GHGs to match the
thresholds set in the Tailoring Rule. See the docket for this proposed
rulemaking for a copy of Iowa's letter.
    In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, published on December 30, 2010, EPA
withdrew its approval of Iowa's SIP (among other SIPs) to the extent
that the SIP applies PSD permitting requirements to GHG emissions from
sources emitting at levels below those set in the Tailoring Rule.\7\ As
a result, Iowa's current approved SIP provides the State with authority
to regulate GHGs, but only at and above the Tailoring Rule thresholds;
and requires new and modified sources to receive a Federal PSD permit
based on GHG emissions only if they emit or have potential to emit at
or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources
in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 82536 (December
30, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The basis for this proposed SIP revision is that limiting PSD
applicability to GHG sources to the higher thresholds in the Tailoring
Rule is consistent with the SIP provisions that require assurances of
adequate resources, and thereby addresses the flaw in the SIP that led
to the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule. Specifically, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)
includes as a requirement for SIP approval that states provide
``necessary assurances that the State * * * will have adequate
personnel [and] funding * * * to carry out such [SIP].'' In the
Tailoring Rule, EPA established higher thresholds for PSD applicability
to GHG-emitting sources on grounds that the states generally did not
have adequate resources to apply PSD to GHG-emitting sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds,\8\ and no state, including Iowa, asserted
that it did have adequate resources to do so.\9\ In the PSD SIP
Narrowing Rule, EPA found that the affected states, including Iowa, had
a flaw in their SIP at the time they submitted their PSD programs,
which was that the applicability of the PSD programs was potentially
broader than the resources available to them under

their SIP.\10\ Accordingly, for each affected state, including Iowa,
EPA concluded that EPA's action in approving the SIP was in error,
under CAA section 110(k)(6), and EPA rescinded its approval to the
extent the PSD program applies to GHG-emitting sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds.\11\ EPA recommended that states adopt a SIP
revision to incorporate the Tailoring Rule thresholds, thereby (i)
assuring that under state law, only sources at or above the Tailoring
Rule thresholds would be subject to PSD; and (ii) avoiding confusion
under the Federally approved SIP by clarifying that the SIP applies to
only sources at or above the Tailoring Rule thresholds.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Tailoring Rule, 75 FR at 31517.
    \9\ PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR at 82540.
    \10\ Id. at 82542.
    \11\ Id. at 82544.
    \12\ Id. at 82540.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is EPA's analysis of Iowa's proposed SIP revision?

    On December 22, 2010, IDNR submitted a revision of its regulations
to EPA for processing and approval into the SIP. This SIP revision puts
in place the GHG emission thresholds for PSD applicability set forth in
EPA's Tailoring Rule. EPA's approval of Iowa's SIP revision will
incorporate the revisions of the Iowa regulations into the Federally-
approved SIP. Doing so will clarify the applicable thresholds in the
Iowa SIP.
    The State of Iowa's December 22, 2010, proposed SIP revision
establishes thresholds for determining which stationary sources and
modification projects become subject to permitting requirements for GHG
emissions under Iowa's PSD program. Specifically, Iowa's December 22,
2010, proposed SIP revision includes changes--which are already
effective--to Iowa's Administrative Code, revising the subrule 33.3(1)
definition of ``regulated New Source Review (NSR) pollutant'' to
specifically define the term ``subject to regulation'' for the PSD
program, and to define ``greenhouse gases (GHGs)'' and ``tpy
CO2 equivalent emissions (CO2e).'' Additionally,
the amendments to subrule 33.3(1) specify the methodology for
calculating an emissions increase for GHGs, the applicable thresholds
for GHG emissions subject to PSD, and the schedule for when the
applicability thresholds take effect.
    Iowa is currently a SIP-approved State for the PSD program, and has
previously incorporated EPA's 2002 NSR reform revisions for PSD into
its SIP. See 72 FR 27056 (May 14, 2007). The changes to Iowa's PSD
program regulations are substantively the same as the Federal
provisions amended in EPA's Tailoring Rule. As part of its review of
Iowa's submittal, EPA performed a line-by-line review of Iowa's
proposed revision and has preliminarily determined that it is
consistent with the Tailoring Rule.

IV. Proposed Action

    Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve
Iowa's December 22, 2010 revisions to the Iowa SIP, relating to PSD
requirements for GHG-emitting sources. Specifically, Iowa's December
22, 2010, proposed SIP revision establishes appropriate emissions
thresholds for determining PSD applicability to new and modified GHG-
emitting sources in accordance with EPA's Tailoring Rule. EPA has made
the preliminary determination that this SIP revision is approvable
because it is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding
PSD permitting for GHGs.
    If EPA does approve Iowa's changes to its air quality regulations
to incorporate appropriate thresholds for GHG permitting applicability
into Iowa's SIP, then section 52.822(b) of 40 CFR part 52, as included
in EPA's PSD SIP Narrowing Rule--which codifies EPA's limiting its
approval of Iowa's PSD SIP to not cover the applicability of PSD to
GHG-emitting sources below the Tailoring Rule thresholds--is no longer
necessary. In today's proposed action, EPA is also proposing to amend
section 52.822(b) of 40 CFR part 52 to remove this unnecessary
regulatory language.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 7661a(d); 40 CFR 52.02(a); 40
CFR 70.1(c). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves the State's law as
meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by the State's law. For that reason,
the proposed approvals of Iowa's revision to its SIP relating to GHGs:
     Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' under the terms
of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and are
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are 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
     Do 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 SIP program is not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that it 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, Intergovernmental
relations, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: August 3, 2011.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2011-20455 Filed 8-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8416-8417]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03207]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0647]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; CBWTP Outfall Diffuser Improvements, Columbia River,
Portland, OR

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary final rule; extension of effective period.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending a temporary final rule currently
establishing a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Columbia
River. This temporary rule extends the duration of the temporary safety
zone an additional 15 days. This action is necessary to provide for the
safety of life on these navigable waters near Portland, OR, at Columbia
River Mile 105.6 during construction through the newly anticipated end
date of March 15, 2022. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels
from being in the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Sector Columbia River or a designated representative.

DATES: The effective period of 33 CFR 165.T13-0647, published at 86 FR
54622 (October 4, 2021), which was set to expire at 11:59 p.m. on
February 28, 2022, is now extended through 11:59 p.m. on March 15,
2022. The amendment in this rule is effective February 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0647 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Sean Morrison, Waterways Management Division, Marine
Safety Unit Portland, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    As the final document in a notice-and-comment rulemaking, on
October 4, 2021, the Coast Guard published a temporary final rule (TFR)
entitled ``Safety Zone; BWTP Outfall Diffuser Improvements, Columbia
River, Portland, OR'' (86 FR 54622) that established a temporary safety
zone regulation, 33 CFR 165.T13-0647, and made it effective from from
November 1, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. on February 28, 2022. This new TFR
is extending the effective period of that regulation to 11:59 p.m. on
March 15, 2022.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking with respect
to this rule because it would be impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. The Coast Guard was unable to publish an NPRM and hold
a reasonable comment period for this rulemaking due to the notification
of unpredictable weather related complications and the construction
extension request being made on January 6, 2022. Delaying the effective
date of this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential
safety hazards associated with the CBWTP Outfall Diffuser Improvements
Project before the safety zone is lifted.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Columbia
River (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with the
construction project will be a safety concern for anyone within the
designated area of the CBWTP Outfall Diffuser Improvements. The purpose
of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels and the navigable waters in
the safety zone during the scheduled construction period.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    We received no comments on our notice of proposed rulemaking
published August 22, 2021 (86 FR 47044), for the TFR currently in
place. The only change in the regulatory text of this rule is extending
the effective period until March 15, 2022.
    The currently established temporary safety zone is effective from
12:01 a.m. on November 1, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. on February 28,
2022. This rule extends the duration of the temporary safety zone
through 11:59 p.m. on March 15, 2022. The safety zone will continue to
cover all navigable waters of the Columbia River, surface to bottom,
approximately 300 yards to the east and west side of the Burlington
Northern Railroad Bridge on the Oregon side of the Columbia River from
the shoreline to the outside of the main navigational channel;
specifically beginning at the shoreline at 45[deg]37' 26.2' N,
122[deg]41' 46.91' W, northeast to 45[deg]37' 33.206' N, 122[deg]41'
37.699' W, southeast to 45[deg]37' 23.4' N, 122[deg]41' 18.1' W, thence
southwest to 45[deg]37' 16.27' N, 122[deg]41' 30.75' W, and along the
shoreline back to the beginning point. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters
while the construction project is underway. The duration of the zone is
intended to ensure the safety of vessels and these navigable waters
during the construction period. No vessel or person will be permitted
to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or
a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory

approaches that maximize net benefits. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-year of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit around this safety zone which will
impact a small designated area of the Columbia River during the
construction project. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Notice to
Mariners about the zone, and the rule will allow vessels to seek
permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. While some owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small
entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A above, this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
extending a temporary safety zone by 15 days that will prohibit vessel
traffic to transit the area during construction operations. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Revise Sec.  165.T13-0647(d) to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T13-0647  Safety Zones: Safety Zone; CBWTP Outfall Diffuser
Improvements, Columbia River, Portland, OR.

* * * * *
    (d) Enforcement period. This safety zone is in effect from 12:01
a.m. on November 1, 2021, through 11:59 p.m. on March 15, 2022. It will
be subject to enforcement this entire period unless the Captain of the
Port Columbia River determines it is no longer needed, in which case
the Coast Guard will inform mariners via Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: February 3, 2022.
G.M. Bailey,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Columbia River.
[FR Doc. 2022-03207 Filed 2-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70298-70299]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28080]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: CP14-16-000.
    Applicants: Atmos Energy Corporation.
    Description: Abbreviated Application for Approval of Abandonment of
Section 284.224 Blanket Certificate.
    Filed Date: 11/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20131101-5081.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1230-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Refund Report in Docket Nos. RP13-1230, RP08-426,
RP10-1398.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5042.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1231-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Refund Report in Docket Nos. RP13-1231, RP08-426,
RP10-1398.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5044.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-157-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas files a Petition for a Limited
Waiver of Northern's FERC Gas Tariff to allow resolution of an
imbalance with the imbalance-to-storage mechanism for Marabou Midstream
Services, LP.
    Filed Date: 11/7/13.
    Accession Number: 20131107-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/19/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-159-000.
    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Clean-up Filing--2013 to be effective 12/9/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5014.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-160-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Amendment to Neg Rate Agmt (Devon 10-12) to be
effective 11/11/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20131112-5001.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/25/13.

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

 Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-820-003.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Second Compliance Filing in Docket No. RP12-820, et
al. to be effective 7/24/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/8/13.
    Accession Number: 20131108-5015.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP13-1105-005.
    Applicants: Energy West Development, Inc.
    Description: Energy West Development, Inc. submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance GT &38; C sec 35 Filing to 154 to be
effective 12/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 11/12/13.
    Accession Number: 20131112-5005.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/25/13.

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

other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202)
502-8659.

    Dated: November 12, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-28080 Filed 11-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28873-28875]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11627]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2012-1091]

Availability of Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for the Proposed Modification of the Bayonne Bridge
Across the Kill Van Kull Between Bayonne, Hudson County, New Jersey and
Staten Island, Richmond County, New York

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a Final
Environmental Assessment (Final EA) which examines the reasonably
foreseeable environmental impacts and socio-economic impacts of the
proposed modification of the historic Bayonne Bridge across the Kill
Van Kull between Bayonne, New Jersey and Staten Island, New York. This
notice also announces the availability of the Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI). Because the Bayonne Bridge is a structure over
navigable waters of the United States, the proposed bridge modification
requires a Coast Guard Bridge Permit Amendment. This notice provides
information on where to view the Final EA and FONSI, which consider an
application by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (PANYNJ) for
Coast Guard approval of the modification to the Bayonne Bridge across
the Kill Van Kull.

ADDRESSES: We have provided a copy of the Final EA and FONSI in our
online docket at http://www.regulations.gov. Also, the Coast Guard
First District Bridge Office at 1 South Street Bldg 1, New York, NY
10004-1466 will maintain a printed copy of the Final EA and FONSI for
public viewing. The document will be available for inspection at this
location between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The document will also be available for inspection in
the locations shown in the section below titled ``Viewing the Final EA
and FONSI.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Christopher Bisignano, Bridge Management Specialist,
First Coast Guard District, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing material on the docket, call Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Authority: The Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact have been prepared in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et. seq.); Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing NEPA (40 CFR
1500-1508) and associated CEQ guidelines; Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 5100.1, Environmental Planning Program;
and United States Coast Guard Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures and Policy
for Considering Environmental Impacts.
    Viewing the Final EA and FONSI: To view Final EA and FONSI go to
http://www.regulations.gov, insert ``USCG-2012-1091'' in the Search
box, press Enter, then click on the ``Open Docket Folder'' option. If
you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket online
by visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility. The Final EA and FONSI are also available online at http://www.uscg.mil/d1/prevention/Bridges.asp, www.dhs.gov/nepa, and http://www.panynj.gov/bayonnebridge/, and are available from 10 a.m.-3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday (except federal holidays and as noted below), for
inspection at the following locations:
    1. U.S. Coast Guard Battery Bldg, 1 South Street, Building 1, New
York, NY 10004
    2. U.S. Coast Guard Sector New York, 212 Coast Guard Drive, Staten
Island, NY 10305
    3. Bayonne City Hall, 630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ 07002
    4. Staten Island Borough Hall, 10 Richmond Terrace, Room 100,
Staten Island, NY 10301
    5. Bayonne Public Library, 630 Avenue C, Bayonne, NJ 07002 (Also
available from 12 p.m.-5 p.m. on Saturdays)
    6. Port Richmond-NY Public Library, 75 Bennett Street, Staten
Island, NY 10302 (Also available 12 p.m.-5 p.m. on Thursdays and
Saturdays)
    7. Ironbound Community Corp, 317 Elm Street, Newark, NJ 07105
    8. New York Assembly District 61, 853 Forest Avenue, Staten Island,
NY 10301

    9. New Jersey Legislative District 31, 447 Broadway, Bayonne, NJ
07002
    10. New York City Council District 49, 130 Stuyvesant Place, Staten
Island, NY 10301
    11. Staten Island Community Board 1, 1 Edgewater Plaza, Room 217,
Staten Island, NY 10305
    Privacy Act: Anyone can search the electronic form of comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a
Privacy Act, system of records notice regarding our public dockets in
the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Background and Purpose

    Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) has proposed to
modify the Bayonne Bridge across navigable waters of the United States
by raising the roadway thereby increasing the vertical navigational
clearance from approximately 151 feet to 215 feet at Mean High Water. A
thorough description of the project and how it would be completed can
be found at the project's Web site: http://www.panynj.gov/bayonnebridge/.
    The proposed bridge modification project has been identified as a
nationally or regionally significant project under ''Implementing
Executive Order 13604 on Improving Performance of Federal Permitting
and Review of Infrastructure Projects: A Federal Plan for Modernizing
the Federal Permitting and Review Process for Better Projects, Improved
Environmental and Community Outcomes, and Quicker Decisions,'' dated
June 2012, which requires agencies to identify and expedite the
permitting and environmental review process for regionally or
nationally significant infrastructure projects. The existing Bayonne
Bridge has a vertical navigational clearance of approximately 151 feet
above the Kill Van Kull at Mean High Water. The applicant proposes to
increase the vertical navigational clearance to approximately 215 feet
above the waterway at Mean High Water to provide greater clearances to
accommodate larger, Post-Panamax vessels and thereby ensure the long-
term viability of the Port of New York and New Jersey. Post-Panamax
vessels are wider and taller ships with deeper drafts that will be able
to traverse through the Panama Canal once improvements on the canal are
completed in 2014. The expanded purpose of the Bayonne Bridge project
is to improve the substandard features and seismic stability of the
existing bridge and ensure it conforms to modern highway and structural
design standards. In addition, the existing bridge is eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, the
Coast Guard initiated consultation under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. The Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation accepted the Coast Guard invitation to participate in the
Section 106 process. As a result, a Section 106 Programmatic Agreement
was formulated and then executed on May 7, 2013. The Section 106
Programmatic Agreement has been included in the Final EA.
    The Coast Guard issued a NEPA Workplan, dated September 2011, which
provided a discussion of the project's Purpose and Need, project
alternatives and the framework of the environmental analysis. On
October 31, 2011, the Coast Guard held a coordination meeting with
city, state and federal agencies to discuss the project's scope and the
NEPA Workplan. On November 14, 2011, the Coast Guard issued a
solicitation requesting comments from the general public for the scope
of the project and the NEPA Workplan. Comments received following the
meeting and during the solicitation comment period included concerns
from the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, the Environmental
Protection Agency, various private organizations and individuals, and
others regarding additional cargo volumes due to larger ships entering
the Port of New York and New Jersey, the expansion of the port and port
facilities, and the related impacts to air quality and traffic. In
response to these comments, an Induced Demand Analysis was conducted by
an independent source to study the impact of the proposed action to
those communities surrounding the Port of New York and New Jersey.
Further information regarding this analysis can be found in Chapter 18
of the Final EA and in Appendix I. In addition, the Coast Guard met
with representatives from minority and low income communities in Staten
Island, NY and Newark, NJ to explain the Coast Guard bridge permit
process and to ensure those communities had a voice in the public
comment process.
    On January 4, 2013, the Coast Guard published a notice in the
Federal Register announcing the availability of the Draft EA, inviting
comments on it, and announcing the dates and locations of two public
meetings on the Draft EA (78 FR 740). On January 25, 2013, the Coast
Guard published a supplemental notice in the Federal Register
announcing the extension of the comment period to 60 days, and a third
public meeting. Public meetings were held on February 5, 2013, in
Bayonne, NJ, February 7, 2013, in Staten Island, NY, and February 13,
2013, in Newark, NJ. Based on the information received during the 60-
day public comment period, and during the three public meetings, the
Coast Guard has determined that a Final Environmental Assessment is the
most appropriate level of environmental documentation for this project.
The Coast Guard has determined that there are no significant impacts
and has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact. The Final EA and
appendices and FONSI are available online in the www.regulations.gov
docket as well as at http://www.uscg.mil/d1/prevention/Bridges.asp.
    Alternatives for the proposed project considered include: (1)
Taking no action; (2) various build alternatives that satisfy the
purpose and need; (3) a tunnel; (4) new cargo terminals constructed
downstream of the Bayonne Bridge; and (5) a ferry service in lieu of
the bridge. Build alternatives included raising the roadway within the
existing superstructure (preferred), jacking the arch superstructure,
converting to a lift bridge, or constructing a new bridge.
    As a structure over navigable waters of the United States, it
requires a Coast Guard Bridge Permit Amendment pursuant to the Bridge
Act of March 23, 1906, as amended, Title 33 U.S.C. 491. Additionally,
the bridge permit amendment would be the major federal action in this
undertaking since federal funds will not be used, and therefore the
Department of Homeland Security, through the Coast Guard is the federal
lead agency for review of potential effects on the human environment,
including historic properties, pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the
National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.).
    The Coast Guard, with assistance from PANYNJ, has prepared a Final
EA in accordance with NEPA. See ``Viewing the Final EA and FONSI''
above. The Final EA identifies and examines the reasonable alternatives
(including ``No Build'') and assesses the potential for impact to the
human environment, including historic properties, of the alternative
proposals.
    This notice is issued under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 552 (a).
Additionally, the Final EA and FONSI have been prepared in accordance
with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations for Implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508) and associated CEQ
guidelines; Department of Homeland Security Management Directive
5100.1, Environmental Planning Program; and United States Coast Guard
Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, National Environmental Policy Act
Implementing Procedures and Policy for Considering Environmental
Impacts.

    Dated: May 10, 2013.
Brian L. Dunn,
Administrator, Office of Bridge Programs, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-11627 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 76727]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30938]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-2192-000]

Red Mesa Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

December 1, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Red Mesa Wind, 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 December 21, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30938 Filed 12-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P