STATE OF TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION DIVISION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 9TH FLOOR L& C ANNEX 401 CHURCH STREET NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37243 1531 December 30, 2002 J. I. Palmer, Jr. Regional Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 3 03 03 Re: Clean Air Act  Early Action Compacts Dear Mr. Palmer:

This letter is to confirm that eight early action compacts have been forwarded under separate cover to Ms. Kay Prince of your staff. The early action compacts are for the following areas:

Memphis Area Nashville Area Chattanooga Area Knoxville Area Tri Cities Area Putnam County Lawrence County Haywood County In preparing these documents, we worked closely with the four local air pollution control programs of Tennessee and the states of Georgia, Mississippi and Arkansas. I understand that the other states are forwarding their component of an early action plan for an MSA shared with Tennessee to you under separate cover. Mr. Palmer December 30, 2002 Page Two If your staff should have any questions, they should contact my deputy, Quincy Styke III or me at ( 615) 532 0554. We look forward to working with EPA in the next few months as we determine the scope of the air quality improvement plans for the above listed areas. As the scope of those plans is developed, the signatories will make a determination to see if they wish to continue to remain in an early action compact.

Sincerely, I Barry R. Stephens, P. E. Technical Secretary Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board copy to: Kay Prince, EPA Region IV Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board Tennessee Tennessee Local Air Programs State of Georgia State of Mississippi State of Arkansas EARLY ACTION COMPACT FOR THE State of Tennessee and Chattanooga MSA Prepared for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION DESCRIPTION PAGE 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE EARLY ACTION COMPACT 3 2.0 BACKGROUND 3 2.1 Air Quality Status/ Trends 3 2.2 History of Local Air Quality Planning Efforts 4 2.3 The Early Action Compact/ Air Quality Improvement Plan 4 2.4 Regional Interstate Coordination 5 3.0 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 5 3.1 General Provisions 6 3.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan 6 3.2.1 Milestones and Reporting 6 3.2.2 Emissions Inventories 7 3.2.3 Modeling 8 3.2.4 Emission Reduction Strategies 8 3.2.5 Maintenance for Growth 9 3.2.6 Public Involvement 10 3.3 Local, State, and EPA Commitments 10 3.3.1 State and Local Commitments 10 3.3.2 State Commitments 10 3.3.3 TAPCB Commitments 11 3.3.4 EPA Commitments 12 3.4 Termination Provisions 13 3.5 Signatures 15 4.0 TABLE OF ACRONYMS AS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT 16 3 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE EARLY ACTION COMPACT This Early Action Compact ( EAC) serves as a Memorandum of Agreement among government agencies representing, collectively, local governments, state government s, including the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board ( TAPCB), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). It is for the express purpose of commitment to EPA's " Protocol for Early Action Compacts Designed to Achieve and Maintain the 8 Hour Ozone Standard".

The " Protocol" allows for early voluntary 8 hour air quality improvement plans to be developed through a " Compact" between Local, State, and EPA officials for areas that are in attainment for the 1 hour ozone standard, but approach or monitor exceedances of the 8 hour standard. All areas in Tennessee are currently designated in attainment of the 1 hour ozone standard and, based on preliminary data for 2000 through 2002 a number of areas may not be in attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard. Thus, the areas are eligible and a good candidate for the Early Action Compacts.

The EAC requires the development of an early action plan that includes all necessary elements of a comprehensive air quality plan, but is tailored to local needs and dri ven by local decisions. As long as all Compact terms and milestones are met, the effective date of nonattainment designations is deferred, as are related requirements. The early action approach will offer a more expeditious timeline for achieving emissions reductions than EPA's expected 8 hour implementation rulemaking, while providing " fail  safe" provisions for the area to revert to the traditional State Implementation Plan ( SIP) process if specific milestones are not met. Currently, EPA plans to make the designations for the 8 hour ozone standard in 2004.

According to the latest EPA guidance, this Compact is to be executed no later than December 31, 2002. The air quality improvement plan required of the Compact is to be completed and its elements submitted to the EPA no later than December 31, 2004 to be incorporated into the Tennessee State Implementation Plan.

2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Air Quality Status/ Trends in Tennessee The entire State of Tennessee is currently in attainment for all pollutants with e stablished National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Portions of the State however, are not expected to be in attainment with the 8 hour ozone standard by the end of 2002.

Table 1 provides a summary of the Chattanooga MSA 4th highest 8 hour average readings for 2000, 2001, and 2002 and the design value for the three year period. A design value of 85 ppb or greater represents a nonattainment situation, thus the Chattanooga, MSA area is potentially classified with a nonattainment designation. 4 TABLE 1 Summary Data for 8 Hour Ozone at the Monitoring Sites Within the Chattanooga MSA for 2000 2002 County Site Name MONITOR ID 2000 4th Max. 2001 4th Max. 2002 4th Max. Design Value PPM Hamilton Co Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant 470650028  1 0.095 0.087 0.094 0.092 Hamilton Co Ridgetrail Rd. 470651011  1 0.098 0.082 0.099 0.093 Area adjacent to MSA Meigs Co. 8401 Hwy. 60 471210104  1 0.095 0.085 0.099 0.093 Data Source Table 1. Final 2002 Data. There are no other ambient air ozone monitors in the MSA.

2.2 History of Local Air Quality Planning Efforts The Chattanooga MSA is currently attaining the 1 hour and is not expected to be in attainment for the 8 hour ozone air quality standard in 2002.

Ozone forecasting and outreach programs.

Beginning in April 2001 and culminating in September 2002, a statewide effort was undertaken to develop and implement an effective ozone forecasting and public outreach program. The ozone forecasting project focused on the existing metropolitan areas of the state with the support of the local air pollution control agencies, EPA, TVA and the state Air Pollution Control Division.

Several areas of the state are developing or participating in public outreach programs to encourage voluntary measures that can be taken on Ozone Action Days to help minimize emissions of precursor chemicals that contribute to ozone formation and exceedances.

Ozone forecasts were prepared and issued for the Chattanooga area in Tennessee. Local air quality reports were prepared and issued on a daily basis in the Chattanooga area of the state.

2.3 The Early Action Compact/ Air Quality Improvement Plan Areas formally declared in violation of the NAAQS are designated " nonattainment areas" and must meet certain Clean Air Act requirements such as:

A. New Source Review   requires a comprehensive review of new or expanded industrial operations to minimize air pollution. Emissions controls requirements are more stringent and costly than for attainment areas. 5 B. Transportation Conformity   requires a demonstration that regional longrange transportation plans will not negatively affect progress toward attainment or federal highway funds can be withheld. C. Rate of Progress Requirements   a certain percentage of pollutants must be reduced each year. D. Failure to Attain   consequences of failure to reach attainment by the specified date include stricter control measures and the potential for stiff penalties. E. 10 year Maintenance Plan   includes additional or continuing mandatory programs for 10 years following attainment.

The area's participation in the Early Action Compact Protocol offers several key advantages relative to the traditional nonattainment SIP process. These include:

A. The EAC Protocol is designed to achieve clean air sooner than would be expected under the traditional nonattainment process. B. The EAC Protocol affords the signatories greater flexibility in selecting emission reduction measures and programs that are best suited to local needs and circumstances. C. The EAC Protocol ensures deferral of nonattainment designation and related requirements, thereby avoiding the stigma, cost, and economic development impacts associated with a nonattainment designation while the protocol remains in effect.

The cornerstone of the Early Action Compact Protocol is the Air Quality Improvement Plan ( AQIP) developed to reduce local ozone forming emissions and lower summertime ozone levels. It is the official attainment/ maintenance plan for the area to be developed under the EAC Protocol agreement. It is a comprehensive air quality plan that will be incorporated into a formal Tennessee State Implementation Plan, and the area will be required to carry out this plan just as in nonattainment areas. Unlike a nonattainment area SIP plan, though, the AQIP will be tailored to local needs and driven by local decisions. The specific elements required of the AQIP are described below in Section 3.2. According to the EAC Protocol, it must be completed and submitted by no later than December 31, 2004, to the EPA to be incorporated into the State SIP. However, recent guidance from EPA requires that the local plan must be complete and submitted to the State and EPA by March 31, 2004 to provide adequate time for Tennessee to adopt the plan as a State rule prior to submittal to EPA as a SIP revision by December 31, 2004.

2.4 Regional Interstate Coordination Tennessee has also participated in the Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative and in VISTAS to coordinate air quality management in a multi  state fashion in East Tennessee.

3.0 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT This Early Action Compact ( EAC) is a Memorandum of Agreement between EPA and the local governments in the Chattanooga MSA ( Hamilton and Marion) including the 6 Chattanooga Local Air Pollution Control Program, Meigs County Executive ( Tennessee) and the State of Tennessee represented by TDEC and the TAPCB. It is anticipated that this compact will be supported by the State of Georgia and the local governments of Catoosa County and Walker County of Georgia. It is for the express purpose of developing and implementing an Air Quality Improvement Plan ( AQIP) that will reduce ozone levels and achieve and maintain compliance with the 8 hour ozone standard in the Chattanooga MSA.

3.1 General Provisions A. The signatory parties commit to develop, implement and maintain the AQIP according to Protocol for Early Action Compacts endorsed by EPA on June 19, 2002 ( as supplemented in a letter dated October 18, 2002, from Gregg Cooke, EPA, to Robert Huston, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality), and adhere to all terms and conditions stated in the Protocol. On November 14, 2002, EPA finalized its Early Action Compact guidance memorandum for state and local governments that spelled out specific milestones and tasks for a state or local government to qualify for an early action compact. B. If the area fails to meet all the terms of the EAC, including meeting agreed upon milestones, then it will forfeit its participation and will be subject to designation as nonattainment according to EPA's 8 hour ozone implementation rules. C. Before formal adoption into the Tennessee SIP, this agreement may be modified or terminated by mutual consent of all signatory parties, or any party may withdraw from the agreement. The local government signatories will approve the AQIP before it is submitted to the TAPCB for inclusion in the SIP. Once the AQIP elements are incorporated into the SIP, any modifications will be treated as SIP revisions. D. The signature date of the EAC is the start date of the agreement's term and the agreement remains in effect until December 31, 2007, except as specified above.

3.2 Air Quality Improvement Plan The state and local governments agree to develop and implement an AQIP that will demonstrate attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard by December 31, 2007, and maintenance until at least 2012. The state and local governments will develop this plan in coordination with EPA, stakeholders, and the general public. The AQIP will include a process monitor and maintain long term compliance with the standard. The AQIP wil be finalized and submitted to EPA by March 31, 2004 for submittal by December 31, 2004, for SIP amendment. If a development or issue arises that may impact performance or progress toward milestones, the state or local government signatories will immediately notify all other signatories.

The AQIP will address the following major elements. 7 3.2.1 Milestones and Reporting To facilitate performance monitoring and communication with the EPA, TAPCB, and stakeholders, the EAC protocol requires that the EAC include clearly measurable milestones for the development and implementation of the AQIP. Major milestones established for this EAC are shown below in Table 2. The individual participants representing their respective area will assess and report all progress relative to these milestones to the state which in turn will report all progress relative to these milestones in a regular, public process at least every six months.

Table 2. Major Milestones for the Tennessee State and Local Early Action Compact.

MILESTONE DATE EAC Memorandum of Agreement Executed 31DEC02 Identify & Describe Likely Local Control Measures Being Considered 16JUN03 Initial Progress Report Prepared and Updated Every 6 Months 23JUN03 Emissions Inventories Completed 30JUN03 Base Case/ Future Case Modeling Completed 30SEP03 Control Scenarios Modeling Completed 30NOV03 Adoption of Emission Reduction Measures 30JAN04 Completion/ Adoption of Air Quality Improvement Plan and Submittal to the EPA for Review 31MAR04 Submittal of SIP 31DEC04 All Local Emission Reduction Strategies Implemented 31MAR05 Review Progress in Implementation of Reduction Strategies 30JUN06 EAC Expires 31DEC07 Annual Reviews of Growth 2008 2012 3.2.2 Emission Inventories 8 Base case( s) and related future year ( 2007) emissions inventories will be developed by June 30, 2003. These inventories will be used for input for SIP quality regional airshed modeling, thus they must be developed using tools that are suitable for this purpose and approved by both TDEC and EPA. The base case( s) inventories will be developed for 1999 or later episodes selected to be representative of typical ozone exceedance situations as determined with EPA episode selection guidance. The inventories will include :

A. Point source emissions   employing TDEC Emission Inventory System data. B. Onroad mobile source emissions   employing Mobile 6 emission modeling based on appropriate transportation data for the Chattanooga MSA. C. Nonroad sources  model data adjusted for local equipment usage. D. Area sources  data based, where possible, on local survey data. E. Biogenic sources   inventory developed employing methods acceptable to TDEC and EPA.

Where practicable, trends in emissions from the various source categories will be analyzed to provide a better understanding of emissions trends statewide and to facilitate verification of accuracy of the inventories.

3.2.3 Modeling All modeling will be based on the " Draft Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8 hour Ozone NAAQS" ( EPA 454/ R 99 004, May 1999). The modeling will follow the guidance as facilitated by the EPA Regional Office. Regional airshed modeling for the Air Quality Improvement Plan will employ an EPA accepted modeling technique and appropriate EPA guidance for SIPlevel modeling. Modeling protocol development, episode selection, model input preparation, and actual model simulations will involve close collaboration and agreement of the participating representatives, TAPCB, and EPA. There may also be opportunity to coordinate with representatives of other planning areas for efficiency and consistency in regional modeling efforts.

Base case and future case ( 2007) modeling are scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2003. Control strategy modeling including direction ( e. g. effectiveness of VOC vs. NOx controls) and range finding ( percent reduction scenarios   i. e. needed reduction levels) as well as control strategies scenarios are scheduled to be completed by November 30, 2003.

All adopted Federal and State emission reduction measures that have been or will be implemented by March 31, 2005, will be included in base case, future case, and control strategy modeling.

Modeling efforts will be carefully documented. Model performance will be assessed to assure conformance with EPA's accepted model accuracy criteria. A technical support 9 document describing the modeling effort and attainment demonstration will be part of the AQIP submittal.

3.2.4 Emission Reduction Strategies Following research of various emission reduction strategies and, with guidance provided by testing of various strategies with the developed regional airshed modeling, the participating stakeholders will select and adopt local emission reduction measures necessary to support demonstration of attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard by December 31, 2007. The research, selection, and adoption process for the local measures is scheduled to be completed by March 30, 2004. However, recent EPA guidance requires that likely local measures being considered for the AQIP should be identified and described by June 16, 2003.

The selected local emission reduction measures will be specific, quantifiable, and enforceable. Specific implementation dates, as well as detailed documentation and reporting processes will be provided for each.

The local emission reduction measures will be incorporated by the TAPCB into the SIP and submitted to EPA for review and approval. In the event the area desires to add, delete or substitute measures after SIP promulgation, the area will request a modification of the AQIP. Such modification will be treated as a SIP revision and facilitated by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation ( TDEC).

3.2.5 Maintenance for Growth The AQIP will include a component to address emissions growth at least 5 years beyond December 31, 2007, ensuring that the previous nonattainment or attaining participating areas will remain in attainment of the 8 hour standard during that period. The future attainment maintenance analysis may employ one or more of the following or any other appropriate techniques necessary to make such a demonstration:

A. Modeling analysis showing ozone levels below the 8 hour standard in 2012; B. An annual review of growth ( especially stationary and mobile sources) to ensure control measures and growth assumptions are adequate; C. Identification and quantification of federal, state, and/ or local measures indicating sufficient reductions to offset growth estimates.

The AQIP will also detail a continuing planning process that includes modeling updates and modeling assumption verification ( particularly growth assumptions) where changes in emissions inventories and growth assumptions warrant. The continuing planning process will consider and evaluate:

A. All relevant actual new point sources and major modifications of existing sources; 10 B. Impacts from increased emissions from potential new source growth; C. Future transportation patterns and their impact on air quality in a manner that is consistent with the most current adopted Chattanooga Area Long Term Transportation Plan and most current estimate of future local motor vehicle emissions as adopted in the Chattanooga Area MPO's conformity documents approved by the U. S. Department of Transportation and EPA.

If the review of growth demonstrates that adopted emission reduction measures are inadequate to address growth in emissions, additional measures will be added to the AQIP through the SIP revision process.

3.2.6 Public Involvement Public involvement will be conducted in all stages of the planning and implementation process. Public education programs will be used to raise awareness regarding issues, opportunities for involvement in the planning process, implementation of control strategies, and any other issues important to the participants. Interested stakeholders will be involved in the planning process as early as possible. They will be provided advance notice of meeting times, locations, and agenda for planning meetings. Plan drafts will be publicly available, and the document development process will have sufficient opportunities for comment from all interested stakeholders. Stakeholders will include, at a minimum, local environmental groups, Chambers of Commerce and other bu siness groups, and the transportation community. Public comment on the proposed final AQIP will follow the normal SIP revision process as implemented by TAPCB. Semi  annual reports detailing, at a minimum, progress toward milestones will be publicly prese nted and available.

3.3 Local, State, and EPA Commitments 3.3.1 State and Local Commitments The State, including TDEC, and Local Governments will jointly hold responsibility for the development and implementation of the early action plan ( Air Quality Improv ement Plan), as well as for maintaining communication with all parties to the Compact. The Chattanooga Local Air Pollution Control Program will be the lead agency in Hamilton County and TDEC will be the lead agency for the remaining Chattanooga MSA counti es. Other responsibilities include:

A. Drawing up the Compact, which embodies the requirements described in the EAC Protocol, including a time line for milestones; B. Completing and signing by all parties of the Early Action Compact no later than December 31, 2002; C. Completing and adopting the emission reduction measures elements of the AQIP as part of the SIP no later than March 31, 2004. D. Notifying parties as soon as possible if Compact milestones will be missed or have been missed; 11 E. Notifying parties as soon as possible if Compact modification/ termination is to be requested.

3.3.2 State Commitments The State, represented by TDEC and TDOT, will provide support to all participants throughout the planning and implementation process. Areas of support will includ e:

A. Technical assistance in the development of emission inventories, modeling process, trend analysis, and quantification and comparison of emission reduction strategies; B. Necessary information on all Federal and State adopted emission reduction measures which affect the area; C. Critical third party review of emissions inventory, modeling, and self  evaluation work; D. Technical and strategic assistance, as appropriate, in the selection and implementation of emission reduction strategies; E. Technical and planning assistance in developing and implementing processes to address the impact of emissions growth beyond the attainment date; F. Maintenance of monitors and reporting and analysis of monitoring data; G. Support for public education efforts; H. Coordinate communication between stakeholders and EPA to facilitate continuing EPA review of local work; I. Propose a modification of the SIP to adopt the appropriate elements of the AQIP; J. Adoption of emission reduction strategies into the SIP as expeditiously as possible. The final complete SIP revision must be completed, adopted, and submitted by the state to EPA by December 31, 2004.

3.3.3 Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board Commitments The Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board, in consultation with TDEC, the local governments, interested stakeholders and members of the public will help to ensure that actions under the Early Action Compact are tailored to the needs of the Chattanooga MSA and that adequate progress is attained under the AQIP. In consultation with the aforementioned, the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board will:

A. By February 1, 2003 develop a plan for routine state level consultation with members of the environmental, public health and business 12 communities as well as opportunities for timely public input and comment. B. By March 1, 2003, develop measurable goals and milestones, building on those listed in Table 2: identify the consequences of failure to achieve goals and milestones and provide samples of acceptable control measures for the AQIP. C. Every 6 months conduct a formal review of progress attained under the EAC, including determining whether the terms of the EAC, in general and with respect to each local area, should be modified or revoked.

3.3.4 EPA Commitments The EPA will recognize the State and Local commitment to voluntarily adopt an early, substantive, scientifically based and enforceable attainment plan with early implementation of control measures by becoming a party to the Early Action Compact developed in conformance with the EPA's EAC Protocol. EPA responsibilities include: A. Provided that the monitors in the Chattanooga MSA reflect attainment by December 31, 2007, EPA will move expeditiously to designate those areas as attainment and impose no additional requirements other t han those federally approved SIP revisions undertaken pursuant to this Early Action Compact. The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has announced changes for Core Based Statistical Areas ( 65 FR 82228,12/ 27/ 2000 FR ) and plans to publish new lists of areas in June 2003. EPA will be evaluating OMB's new lists after they are released to determine whether they concur and/ or can still use OMBs' new definition for purposes of the starting point for nonattainment area boundaries. At that time EPA will also look at the nonattainment boundary guidance memo of 3/ 28/ 2000 to see if it might need updating based on the OMB work. B. If monitors in the Chattanooga MSA reflect nonattainment when EPA's 8 hour implementation guidelines call for designations or at any time d uring the area's participation in the Early Action Compact, EPA will defer the effective date of nonattainment designation and related requirements for the area as long as all terms and milestones of the compact are being met, including submission of the early action SIP revision by 2004. C. The EPA will provide technical assistance to all Chattanooga MSA participants in the development of the AQIP. D. The EPA will move quickly to review and approve completed plans by no later than nine months after submission of the SIP revision by TDEC. 13 E. Provided that the area has progressed from nonattainment to attainment status by December 31, 2007, EPA will move expeditiously to designate the area as attainment and impose no additional requirements. F. If at any time the area does not meet all the terms of this Compact, including meeting agreed upon milestones, then it will forfeit its participation and be designated ( or re designated if necessary) according to EPA's 8 hour ozone implementation guidelines. The EPA will offer such an area no delays, exemptions or other favorable treatment because of its previous participation in this program. G. If any of the monitors identified in Table 1 violates the standard after December 31, 2007, the area will be designated nonattainment. TDEC will then submit a revised attainment demonstration SIP revision according to the Clean Air Act ( CAA) and EPA's 8 hour implementation rule, unless the 8 hour implementation schedule requires SIPs from 8 hour nonattainment areas before December 31, 2008. In that event, a revised attainment demonstration SIP revision for the participating area will be due as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2008. In no event will EPA extend the attainment date for the area beyond that required by the CAA and/ or EPA's 8 hour implementation rule. H. The region will not be allowed to renew this EAC after December 31, 2007, or to initiate a new compact if it has previously forfeited its participation.

3.4 Termination Provision:

This Early Action Compact is offered to EPA in good faith as a way to achieve clean air quicker with the opportunity to tailor a control plan in the most beneficial way possible for the Chattanooga MSA. It is expressly declared that prior to adoption of early control measures into the Tennessee SIP, a signatory to this Early Action Compact may opt out of the process by filing a written notice to the other signatories. In filing said written termination notice, the terminating entity will revert to the routine attainment designation process provided in the Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations in effect at the time of the signing of this document. If any of the counties of Hamilton or Marion, opt out of this process, the Chattanooga MSA Compact shall be terminated since these counties are a part of a single transportation conformity modeling process through the Chattanooga Area MPO. It is also recognized that if EPA deems the terminating entity's emissions are critical to the success of an Early Action Compact, EPA may nullify the Early Action Compact for the entire MSA.

In evaluating certain public participation documents that were filed as part of the process that created this document, it is apparent that not all entities agree with the concept of an Early Action Compact. If litigation should ensue that results in the inability of any entity 14 to live up to the commitments made including actual SIP revisions, then the signatories shall have the option of withdrawing all or part of any SIP revision given to EPA as part of the Early Action Compact and EPA shall honor that withdrawal. 16 4.0 Table of Acronyms as Used in this Document MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area EAC Early Action Compact EPA Environmental Protection Agency TAPCB Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board SIP State Implementation Plan ppb parts per billion GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating OBD II On Board Diagnostics I/ M Inspection and Maintenance TVA Tennessee Valley Authority NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards AQIP Air Quality Improvement Plan SAMI Southern Appalachian Mountain Initiative VISTAS Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast VOC Volatile Organic Compound NOX Nitrogen Oxide TDEC Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation MPO Metropolitan Planning Office TDOT Tennessee Department of Transportation CAA Clean Air Act


MEMORANDUM

DATE:                  12/1/14

FROM:                Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4

TO:                      Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR - 2013-0602

SUBJECT:            Discussion of the Clean Power Plan with the Georgia Bar Association's Environmental Law Section  -  Summer Session

SUMMARY:         REGION 4 PROVIDED INFORMATION ON THE CLEAN POWER PLAN TO A GROUP OF Georgia attorneys and consultants at the Georgia Bar Association's Environmental Law Section  -  Summer Session in St. Simons Island, GA, on August 1, 2014.  The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014.   ATTENDEES:

EPA Heather McTeer Toney/EPA R4  Brandi Jenkins/EPA R4

External Stakeholders Approximately 75, including members of the Georgia Bar Association  -  Environmental Law Section


[Federal Register: December 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 244)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 76983-76985]
[DOCID:fr18de08-29]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1104; Airspace Docket No. 08-ACE-2]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Sioux City, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Sioux City,
IA. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at Sioux

Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA. The FAA is taking
this action to enhance the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) aircraft operations at Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day
Field.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before February 2,
2009.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2008-1104/Airspace Docket No. 08-
ACE-2, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, TX 76193-0530; telephone: (817)
222-5582.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2008-1104/
Airspace Docket No. 08-ACE-2.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's
should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional controlled Class E airspace for
SIAPs operations at Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field, Sioux
City, IA. The area would be depicted on appropriate aeronautical
charts.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9S, dated October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
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
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, 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 would amend
controlled airspace at Sioux City, IA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated October 3, 2008, and effective October 31,
2008, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ACE IA E5 Sioux City, IA [Amended]

Sioux City, Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field, IA
    (Lat. 42[deg]24'09'' N., long. 96[deg]23'04'' W.)
Sioux City VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]20'40'' N., long. 96[deg]19'25'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field
and within 3 miles each side of the 139[deg] radial of the Sioux
City VORTAC extending from the 7-mile radius to 17.8 miles southeast
of the VORTAC, and within 3 miles each side of the 319[deg] radial
of the Sioux City VORTAC extending from the 7-mile radius to 25.3
miles northwest of the VORTAC, and within 3.8 miles each side of the
316[deg] bearing from Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day Field
extending from the 7-mile radius to 10.5 miles northwest of the
airport, and within 4 miles each side of the 001[deg] bearing from
Sioux Gateway Airport/Col. Bud Day

Field extending from the 7-mile radius to 12 miles northwest of the
airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX on December 10, 2008.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E8-30022 Filed 12-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 27, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 45101]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16119]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-2419-000]

Lockhart Solar PV, LLCl 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
Lockhart Solar PV, 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 August 10, 2022.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at https://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 (https://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: July 21, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-16119 Filed 7-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 33742]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13699]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13563-003]

Juneau Hydropower, Inc.; Notice of Application Tendered for
Filing With the Commission

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Major Original License.
    b. Project No.: 13563-003.
    c. Date filed: May 29, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Juneau Hydropower, Inc.
    e. Name of Project: Sweetheart Lake Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Sweetheart Lake and Sweetheart Creek in the City
and Borough of Juneau, Alaska. The project will occupy about 2,058
acres of federal lands located in the Tongass National Forest
administered by the United States Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Duff W. Mitchell, Business Manager, Juneau
Hydropower, Inc., P.O. Box 22775, Juneau, AK 99802;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: John Matkowski at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item k below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. Deadline for requests for cooperating agency status: July 28,
2014.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
requests for cooperating agency status using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance,
please contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866)
208-3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The
first page of any filing should include docket number P-13563-003.
    l. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    m. The proposed Sweetheart Lake Project would consist of: (1) The
existing Sweetheart Lake with a surface area of 1,702 acres and an
active storage capacity of 94,069 acre-feet at normal maximum water
elevation; (2) a 280-foot-long, 111-foot-high roller-compacted concrete
dam; (3) an intake structure with a fish screen; (4) a 9,621-foot-long,
15-foot-high, 15-foot-wide unlined power tunnel conveying flow from the
project intake to the penstock; (5) a 1,056-foot-long, 7- to 9-foot-
diameter penstock, the initial 896 feet of which is located in the
lower power tunnel; (6) a 160-foot-long, 60-foot-wide powerhouse
containing three 6.6-megawatt Francis generating units; (7) a 541-foot-
long tailrace that will flow into Sweetheart Creek; (8) a 25-foot-long,
5-foot-wide, 4-foot-deep salmon smolt re-entry pool located adjacent to
the powerhouse and tailrace; (9) a switchyard adjacent to the
powerhouse; (10) an 8.69-mile-long, 138-kilovolt (kV) transmission line
consisting of buried, submarine, and overhead segments; (11) a 2.8-
mile-long, 12.47-kV service line; (12) a 4,400-foot-long access road;
(13) marine access facilities including a dock, ramp, and landing site;
(14) a caretaker facility near the powerhouse; (15) a shelter facility
at the dam site; and (16) appurtenant facilities. The proposed
Sweetheart Lake Project would have an average annual generation of 116
gigawatt-hours.
    n. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item h above.
    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.
    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following preliminary Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the
schedule will be made as appropriate.

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Notice of Acceptance/Notice of       November 2014.
 Ready for Environmental Analysis.
Filing of Comments, Terms and Conditions,  January 2015.
 Recommendations and Prescriptions.
Commission issues Draft Environmental      August 2015.
 Impact Statement (EIS).
Comments on draft EIS....................  October 2015.
Commission issues final EIS..............  March 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 5, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-13699 Filed 6-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 201 (Thursday, October 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58379-58380]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22911]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-0028]

CSX Transportation's Request for Testing Approval on Its
Certified Positive Train Control System

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides the public with notice that on August
22, 2021, CSX Transportation (CSX) submitted its Test Request for Trip
Optimizer Air Brake Control (TO Air Brake Control), Revision 1, dated
August 22, 2021, to FRA. CSX asks FRA to approve its Test Request so
that it may test its TO Air Brake Control on

track that has been equipped with positive train control (PTC).

DATES: FRA will consider comments received by December 20, 2021 before
taking final action on the Test Request. FRA may consider comments
received after that date to the extent practicable and without delaying
implementation of valuable or necessary modifications to a PTC system.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning this proceeding should identify the
agency name and Docket Number FRA-2010-0028, and may be submitted on
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. For convenience, all active PTC dockets are
hyperlinked on FRA's website at https://railroads.dot.gov/train-control/ptc/ptc-annual-and-quarterly-reports. All comments received
will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov; this
includes any personal information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal,
Train Control, and Crossings Division, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 21, 2021, FRA certified CSX's
Interoperable Electronic Train Management System (I-ETMS) PTC system
per Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 236.1015.
Pursuant to 49 CFR 236.1035, CSX must request FRA-approval of any
regression testing of a certified PTC system that is conducted on the
general rail system. See 49 CFR 236.1035(a). CSX's Test Request
describes the level of testing of its TO Air Brake Control required to
confirm that the air brake control feature design, implementation, and
safety mitigations comply with the document requirements outlined in
the I-ETMS Onboard Segment Requirements Specifications.
    CSX's Test Request are available for review online at
www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FRA-2010-0028). Interested parties are
invited to comment on the Test Request by submitting written comments
or data. During its review of the Test Request, FRA will consider any
comments or data submitted. 49 CFR 236.1011(e). However, FRA may elect
not to respond to any particular comment and, under 49 CFR
236.1009(d)(3), FRA maintains the authority to approve or disapprove
the Test Request at its sole discretion.

Privacy Act Notice

    In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, FRA solicits comments from the
public to better inform its decisions. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of
records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov. To facilitate
comment tracking, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the
name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. If you wish to provide comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact FRA for alternate submission
instructions.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Carolyn R. Hayward-Williams,
Director, Office of Railroad Systems and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2021-22911 Filed 10-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: October 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 206)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 60599-60600]
[DOCID:fr25oc07-25]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0082; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-219-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    It has been found that the implementation of the Inertial
Reference Units (IRU) on the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190] may lead, in
certain degraded modes, to an erroneous Flight Path Angle (FPA)
indication on both Primary Flight Displays, with no alert to the
flight crew. On the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190], FPA is considered as
important as pitch and bank angle for piloting purposes.

    The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to
control the flight path of the airplane. The proposed AD would require
actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 26,
2007.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Empresa
Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343--CEP 12.225, Sao
Jose dos Campos--SP, Brazil.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Operations office

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1405; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0082;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-219-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC),
which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian
Airworthiness Directives 2007-08-03 and 2007-08-04, both effective
August 27, 2007 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI state:

    It has been found that the implementation of the Inertial
Reference Units (IRU) on the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190] may lead, in
certain degraded modes, to an erroneous Flight Path Angle (FPA)
indication on both Primary Flight Displays, with no alert to the
flight crew. On the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190], FPA is considered as
important as pitch and bank angle for piloting purposes.

    The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to
control the flight path of the airplane. The corrective action is
removal of certain wiring connections in the electrical connectors of
both IRUs. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Embraer has issued Service Bulletins 170-34-0019 and 190-34-0009,
both dated February 26, 2007. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 108 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 6 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $62 per product. Where the
service information lists required parts costs that are covered under
warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs.
As we do not control warranty coverage

for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than
estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $58,536, or $542 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE AERONAUTICA S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2007-0082; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-219-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 26, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to EMBRAER Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -
100 SE, -100 SU, -200 LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in Embraer Service
Bulletin 170-34-0019, dated February 26, 2007; and Model ERJ 190-100
STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes;
certificated in any category, as identified in Embraer Service
Bulletin 190-34-0009, dated February 26, 2007.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34:
Navigation.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    It has been found that the implementation of the Inertial
Reference Units (IRU) on the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190] may lead, in
certain degraded modes, to an erroneous Flight Path Angle (FPA)
indication on both Primary Flight Displays, with no alert to the
flight crew. On the ERJ-170 [and ERJ-190], FPA is considered as
important as pitch and bank angle for piloting purposes.
    The unsafe condition is reduced ability of the flightcrew to
control the flight path of the airplane. The corrective action is
removal of certain wiring connections in the electrical connectors
of both IRUs.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD, unless
already done, remove the wiring connections from pins 51 and 52 in
the electrical connectors of both IRUs, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 170-34-0019
or 190-34-0009, as applicable, both dated February 26, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2007-08-03
and 2007-08-04, both effective August 27, 2007, and to Embraer
Service Bulletins 170-34-0019 and 190-34-0009, both dated February
26, 2007, for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 12, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7-21005 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 120)]
[Notices]
[Page 35960-35961]
[DOCID:fr22jn06-124]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54001; File No. 4-429]

Joint Industry Plan; Notice of Filing of Joint Amendment No. 19
to the Intermarket Option Linkage Plan To Modify the Manner in Which
the Participation Fee Applicable to New Participants Is Calculated

June 15, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act'') \1\ and Rule 608 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that on
February 17, 2006, March 16, 2006, April 12, 2006, April 18, 2006, May
2, 2006, and May 22, 2006, International Securities Exchange, Inc.
(``ISE''), Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''), Chicago Board
Options Exchange, Incorporated

(``CBOE''), Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE''), American Stock
Exchange LLC (``Amex''), and NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'')
(collectively, ``Participants'') respectively submitted to the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') Joint Amendment No.
19 to the Plan for the Purpose of Creating and Operating an Intermarket
Option Linkage (the ``Linkage Plan'').\3\ The Joint Amendment proposes
to modify the manner in which the participation fee applicable to new
Participants is calculated.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments from interested persons on the proposed Joint
Amendment to the Linkage Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ On July 28, 2000, the Commission approved a national market
system plan for the purpose of creating and operating an intermarket
options market linkage proposed by the Amex, CBOE, and ISE. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 43086 (July 28, 2000), 65 FR
48023 (August 4, 2000). Subsequently, upon separate requests by the
Phlx, Pacific Exchange, Inc. (n/k/a NYSE Arca, Inc.), and BSE, the
Commission issued orders to permit these exchanges to participate in
the Linkage Plan. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 43573
(November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70851 (November 28, 2000); 43574
(November 16, 2000), 65 FR 70850 (November 28, 2000); and 49198
(February 5, 2004), 69 FR 7029 (February 12, 2004).
    \4\ See Section 11(b) of the Linkage Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description and Purpose of the Amendment

    The purpose of the Joint Amendment is to modify the manner in which
the participation fee applicable to new Participants is calculated. The
participation fee is determined by the Participants and is assessed in
connection with an Eligible Exchange \5\ becoming a new Participant.
The Joint Amendment provides that in determining the amount of the
participation fee, the Participants shall consider one or both of the
following: (i) The portion of costs previously paid by the Participants
for the development, expansion, and maintenance of Linkage \6\
facilities which, under generally accepted accounting principles, could
have been treated as capital expenditures and, if so treated, would
have been amortized over the five years preceding the admission of the
new Participant (and for this purpose all such capital expenditures
shall be deemed to have a five-year amortizable life); and (ii)
previous participation fees paid by other new Participants. These
standards are consistent with the participation fee standards contained
in the Consolidated Tape Plan (``CTA Plan'').\7\ Further, the
Participants would no longer be required to calculate the participation
fee at least once a year. Instead, the participation fee would be
calculated at the time an Eligible Exchange seeks to become a
Participant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Section 2(6) of the Linkage Plan.
    \6\ See Section 2(14) of the Linkage Plan.
    \7\ See Section III(c)(2) of the CTA Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Implementation of the Plan Amendment

    The Participants intend to make the proposed Joint Amendment to the
Linkage Plan reflected in this filing effective when the Commission
approves the Joint Amendment.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed
Joint Amendment to the Linkage Plan 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number 4-429 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number 4-429. 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 proposed Joint Amendment that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
proposed Joint Amendment 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 inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal offices of the Amex, BSE, CBOE, ISE, NYSE Arca, and Phlx. 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 4-429 and should be submitted
on or before July 13, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(29).

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-9854 Filed 6-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: July 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 32142]
[DOCID:fr07jy09-40]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 2

June 22, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP08-295-003.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC submits First Revised
Sheet 137 and 138 to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 7/20/09.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 01, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP96-200-216.
    Applicants: CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Co.
    Description: Center Point Energy Gas Transmission Company submits
negotiated rate agreements with Gavilon, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 01, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP96-312-195.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits clarification
of negotiated rate filing with Louis Dreyfus Energy Services LP under
Rate Schedule PAL, to be effective June 1, 2009.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0087.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 01, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP96-312-196.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits amended
negotiated rate filing under Rate Schedule PAL, to be effective 6/1/09.
    Filed Date: 06/19/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090622-0086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 01, 2009.

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing 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. Such protests
must be filed on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all
the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest 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 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. E9-15868 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 213)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64647-64649]
[DOCID:fr03no06-10]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0629; FRL-8238-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Nitrogen Oxides Allowance Allocations for 2008

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the
Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision consists of the

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) allowance allocations for the 2008
ozone season, in accordance with Maryland's approved NOX SIP
Call trading program. EPA is approving this revision to Maryland's
NOX Reduction and Trading Program in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 2, 2007 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by December 4,
2006. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0629 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0629, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, 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-
2006-0629. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means 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.
    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 during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, and 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State
submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment,
1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Powers<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 21, 2006, the State of Maryland submitted a formal revision
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). Maryland's NOX
Reduction and Trading Program under COMAR 26.11.29 and 26.11.30 was
approved by EPA as meeting the requirements of the NOX SIP
Call on January 10, 2001 (66 FR 1866). The approved program contains
NOX reduction requirements beginning on May 1, 2003 and
establishes allowance allocations for affected trading sources for the
2003 through 2005 ozone seasons. Thereafter, Maryland's approved rule
requires that allocations be updated, three years in advance, for each
subsequent two year period. The allocations for 2006 and 2007 were
approved into Maryland's SIP on March 22, 2004 (55 FR 13236). This SIP
revision consists of Maryland's allocation update for 2008. Allocations
for 2009 are not included in this SIP revision to ensure that
Maryland's NOX Reduction and Trading program does not
conflict with Clean Air Interstate Rule (70 FR 25162 of May 12, 2005)
requirements that will apply to electric generating units (EGUs)
greater than 25 MW starting in 2009.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The revision consists of allocations for the ozone season in 2008
for each of the affected sources for which allocations were provided in
the initial control period (2003 through 2005 ozone seasons). The
allocations for EGUs were derived using each source's average actual
heat input from the 2002 and 2003 ozone seasons multiplied by an
emission rate of 0.15 pounds NOX/MMBTU. The allocations for
non-electric generating units (non-EGUs) are unchanged from the initial
control period. For most sources the 2008 allocations do not differ
significantly from the initial 3-year allocations. The total number of
2008 allocations established for the sources in Maryland that are
subject to its NOX Budget Trading Program are consistent
with the State's budget under the NOX SIP Call.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted by MDE on June 21, 2006
consisting of NOX allowance allocations for the 2008 ozone
season. .
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve
as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on January 2, 2007 without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by December 4, 2006. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional

requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will 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, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 2, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action.
    This action to approve Maryland's NOX SIP Call
allocations for 2008 may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone.

    Dated: October 26, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1070  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                  EPA-Approved Regulations in the Maryland SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Additional
 Code of Maryland administrative                        State effective                          explanation/
  regulations (COMAR) citation       Title/subject           date          EPA approval date  citation at 40 CFR
                                                                                52.1100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
COMAR 26.11.30..................  Policies and
                                   Procedures
                                   Relating to
                                   Maryland's NOX
                                   Reduction and
                                   Trading Program.

                                                  * * * * * * *
COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>...............  Allocation of       6/19/06...........  November 3, 2006    New column for
                                   Allowances.                             [Insert page        2008 allocations
                                                                           number where the
                                                                           document begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E6-18501 Filed 11-2-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: September 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 57767-57768]
[DOCID:fr22se10-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13645-000]

Alaska Power and Telephone Company; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

September 16, 2010.
    On December 21, 2009, the Alaska Power and Telephone Company filed
an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project to be located near Schubee Lake in
the Boroughs of Skagway and Haines, Alaska near Haines, Alaska. The
sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project has two alternatives for the lake intake: a
siphon intake and a conventional intake. The proposed project also has
two alternatives for the penstock: above-ground and directional-bored.
    The siphon intake alternative includes: (1) A fabricated steel
intake screen; (2) an approximately 200-foot-long, 24-inch-diameter
high-density polyethylene pipe connecting the intake screen to the
pumphouse; (3) an 8-foot-long, 24-inch-diameter vacuum tank and a
vacuum pump; (4) a siphon pumphouse; and (5) a 269-acre (maximum pool),
5,000 acre-foot active storage capacity reservoir.
    The conventional intake alternative includes: (1) A 20-foot-high,
200-foot-long timber, rockfill, and concrete dam; (2) an 8-foot-long,
8-foot-wide, 20-foot-high concrete intake box; and (3) a 290-acre
(maximum pool), 6,000 acre-foot active storage capacity reservoir.
    The above-ground penstock alternative includes: (1) A 7,100-foot-
long, 24-inch-diameter steel pipe with polyurethane coating and lining;
(2) concrete and fabricated steel saddle supports; (3) reinforced
concrete thrust blocks; and (4) expansion joints and/or sleeve
couplings.
    The directional-bored penstock alternative includes: (1) A 7,200-
foot-long, 28-inch-diameter tunnel, bored with directional-drilling
equipment by successive backreamings of a pilot hole;

(2) a 7,200-foot-long, 24-inch-diameter steel liner; and (3) grout
between lining and tunnel as required.
    In all of the alternatives, the project would also consist of the
following: (1) A new powerhouse; (2) a turbine/generator unit with an
installed capacity of 4,900 kilowatts; and (3) a 9-mile-long, 34.5-
kilovolt transmission line connected to the grid in the Haines area via
a submarine cable.
    Annual energy production is estimated to be 25 gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Robert S. Grimm, Alaska Power and Telephone
Company, P.O. Box 3222, Port Townsend, WA 98368; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
x120.
    FERC Contact: Dianne Rodman<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-
filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing,
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and
seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13645-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23683 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 174 (Monday, September 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 42686]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0809]

Issuance of Priority Review Voucher; Rare Pediatric Disease
Product

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
issuance of a priority review voucher to the sponsor of a rare
pediatric disease product application. The Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as amended by the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), authorizes FDA to
award priority review vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric
disease product applications that meet certain criteria. FDA is
required to publish notice of the award of the priority review voucher.
FDA has determined that KYMRIAH (tisagenlecleucel), manufactured by
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, meets the criteria for a priority
review voucher.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Opper, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-7911.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the issuance of a priority
review voucher to the sponsor of an approved rare pediatric disease
product application. Under section 529 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360ff), which was added by FDASIA, FDA will award priority review
vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA has determined that
KYMRIAH (tisagenlecleucel), manufactured by Novartis Pharmaceuticals
Corporation, meets the criteria for a priority review voucher. KYMRIAH
(tisagenlecleucel) is indicated for the treatment of patients up to 25
years of age with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)
that is refractory or in second or later relapse.
    For further information about the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority
Review Voucher Program and for a link to the full text of section 529
of the FD&C Act, go tohttps://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/RarePediatricDiseasePriorityVoucherProgram/default.htm. For further
information about KYMRIAH (tisagenlecleucel), go to the Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research cellular and gene therapy products
Web site at https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/CellularGeneTherapyProducts/ApprovedProducts/default.htm.

    Dated: September 5, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-19130 Filed 9-8-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P