[Federal Register: May 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 100)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 29786-29792]
[DOCID:fr24my06-7]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[R04-OAR-2005-KY-0002-200531(a); FRL-8174-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky;
Redesignation of the Boyd County SO2 Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On May 13, 2005, and later clarified in a July 12, 2005,
supplemental submittal, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a
request to redesignate the sulfur dioxide (SO2)
nonattainment area of Boyd County to attainment of the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for SO2. Boyd County is
located within the Huntington-Ashland, West Virginia (WV)-Kentucky
(KY)-Ohio (OH) Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and the Boyd County
SO2 nonattainment area is comprised of the southern portion
of Boyd County. The Commonwealth also submitted, as revisions to the
Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP), a maintenance plan for the
area and a source-specific SIP revision for the Calgon Carbon
Corporation facility in Catlettsburg, Kentucky. EPA is approving the
redesignation request for the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment
area and the maintenance plan for this area. The maintenance plan
provides for the maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in Boyd County
for the next ten years. EPA is also approving the source-specific SIP
revision for the Calgon Carbon Corporation facility.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 24, 2006 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by June 23, 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 Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID No. R04-OAR-2005-KY-0002, by one of the following
methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow

the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ RME. EPA's

electronic public docket and comment system is EPA's preferred method
for receiving comments. Once in the system, select ``quick search,''
then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    3. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    5. Mail: ``R04-OAR-2005-KY-0002,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Stacy
DiFrank, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R04-OAR-2005-KY-
0002. 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://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 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 RME, regulations.gov,
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web
site are ``anonymous access'' systems, 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 RME or 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
RME index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 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 RME
or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection.

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

Table of Contents

I. What is the Background for the Actions?
II. What Actions is EPA Taking?
III. What are the Criteria for Redesignation and Approval of the
Maintenance Plan?
IV. Final Actions
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the Background for the Actions?

    On March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962), EPA designated Boyd County, Kentucky
as nonattainment for SO2 based upon modeling which indicated
that both the annual and the 24-hour SO2 NAAQS were being
violated. The 1978 nonattainment designation covered Boyd County in its
entirety. On November 2, 1979 (44 FR 63104), following the completion
of a monitoring study and at the request of the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, EPA redefined the SO2 nonattainment area to
include only the southern portion of Boyd County (e.g., that part of
the County lying south of Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Northing
Line 4251 km). Thus, after 1979, the Boyd County SO2
nonattainment area has been comprised of only the southern portion of
the County. The major sources of SO2 emissions impacting the
Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area are Calgon Carbon
Corporation's carbon reactivation facility in Catlettsburg, Kentucky
(Calgon Carbon Corporation's facility) and a petroleum refinery in
Catlettsburg operated by Catlettsburg Refining, LLC, a subsidiary of
Marathon

Ashland Petroleum LLC (Marathon Ashland's petroleum refinery).
    On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act)
Amendments, SO2 areas meeting the conditions of section
107(d) of the Act, including pre-existing SO2 nonattainment
areas, were designated nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS by
operation of law. As a result, the Boyd County SO2
nonattainment area remained nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS
following enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments on November 15, 1990.
    Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate areas to attainment if
sufficient data are available to warrant such changes and the area
meets the criteria contained in section 107(d)(3) of the Act, including
full approval of a maintenance plan for the area. On May 13, 2005, and
later clarified in a July 12, 2005, supplemental submittal, Kentucky
submitted a request to redesignate the Boyd County SO2
nonattainment area to attainment status. The request includes modeling
and monitoring data that demonstrates attainment of the SO2
NAAQS. The modeling analysis includes an inventory of SO2
emissions sources located within fifty kilometers (km) of the
nonattainment area. The Commonwealth also submitted a maintenance plan
as a SIP revision which provides for maintenance of the SO2
NAAQS in Boyd County for the next ten years. The maintenance plan
includes a list of emissions sources, their emission rates and other
stack parameters. In addition, Kentucky submitted a source-specific SIP
revision to incorporate specified emissions points and their associated
emissions limits (as set out in the Calgon Carbon Corporation
facility's 2005 title V operating permit) into the Kentucky SIP.

II. What Actions is EPA Taking?

    Through this rulemaking, EPA is taking several related actions. EPA
is redesignating the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area to
attainment status because Kentucky's redesignation request meets the
requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also approving
Kentucky's SIP revision which provides a maintenance plan for Boyd
County (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for redesignation
to attainment status) because the plan meets the requirements of CAA
section 175A. Finally, EPA is approving the source-specific SIP
revision for Calgon Carbon Corporation's facility, which incorporates
specified emissions points and their associated emissions limits (as
detailed in section III below) into the Kentucky SIP.

III. What are the Criteria for Redesignation and Approval of the
Maintenance Plan?

    Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, as amended, specifies five
requirements that must be met to redesignate an area to attainment.
They are as follows:
    1. The area must meet the applicable NAAQS;
    2. The area must have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k);
    3. The area must show improvement in air quality due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions;
    4. The area must meet all applicable requirements under section 110
and part D of the Act; and
    5. The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to
section 175A.
    EPA has reviewed the redesignation request submitted by the
Commonwealth for the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area and
finds that the request meets the five requirements of section
107(d)(3)(E).

1. The Data Shows Attainment of the NAAQS for SO2 in the
Boyd County Nonattainment Area

    Boyd County's 1979 nonattainment designation was based upon
monitored values recorded in the area in the mid 1970s. No ambient air
quality violations of the SO2 NAAQS have occurred in recent
years due to the implementation of permanent and enforceable measures
to reduce ambient SO2 levels. In particular, since the time
of the nonattainment designation, reductions in SO2
emissions have occurred at the Marathon Ashland petroleum refinery and
at the Calgon Carbon Corporation facility--both located in
Catlettsburg, Boyd County, Kentucky.
    There is currently one monitor operating within the Boyd County
SO2 nonattainment area and the redesignation request for the
area is based upon the most recent five years of air quality data
(2001-2005) from that monitor. See Table 1 below. The data was
collected and quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
entered into the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) of the Aerometric
Information Retrieval System (AIRS). The primary SO2 NAAQS
consists of an annual mean of 0.030 parts per million (ppm), not to be
exceeded in a calendar year, and a 24-hour average of 0.14 ppm, not to
be exceeded more than once per calendar year. The secondary
SO2 NAAQS is a 3-hour average of 0.5 ppm, not to be exceeded
more than once per calendar year. The data indicate that the County's
ambient air quality attains the annual and 24-hour primary
SO2 standards, as well as the 3-hour SO2
secondary standard. Kentucky's May 2005 submittal also includes a table
in Appendix C, summarizing the monitoring data that has been collected
in Boyd County since 1975. The Commonwealth's submittal is included and
available for review in both the hard copy and E-Docket for this
rulemaking.

                                                   Table 1.--SO2 Data for Boyd County Ambient Monitors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                OBS
                                                           2nd max 24-hr   OBS    2nd max 3-hr      >0.5 ppm                      OBS
               Monitor ID                      Year            (ppm)         >0.14 ppm          ppm        (1300 [mu]g/    Annual  (ppm)  >0.03 ppm  (80
                                                                          (365 [mu]g/m3)                        m3)                          [mu]g/m3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21-019-0017.............................            2001            .013               0            .038               0           .0045               0
                                                    2002            .020               0            .041               0           .0039               0
                                                    2003            .023               0            .063               0           .0038               0
                                                    2004            .018               0            .061               0           .0041               0
                                                    2005            .023               0            .048               0           .0060               0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For SO2, monitoring data alone is generally insufficient
to assess an area's attainment status. EPA's guidance memorandum
addressing redesignation requests states that for SO2 and
specified other pollutants, ``dispersion modeling will generally be
necessary to evaluate comprehensively sources' impacts.'' See
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director Air Quality
Management Division, to EPA Regional Air Directors, dated September 4,
1992. Typically, attainment planning for SO2

involves dispersion modeling used to demonstrate that the emission
limits adopted by the state are sufficient to assure attainment. With
such modeling, EPA can generally determine an area to be attaining the
standard without further modeling, provided monitoring data also
support that determination.
    An inventory of significant SO2 emissions sources
located within fifty km of the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment
area is contained in the May 2005 maintenance plan submitted by
Kentucky. The SO2 emissions from these sources were used in
a modeling demonstration to show maintenance of the SO2
NAAQS for at least ten years. A summary of the modeling demonstration
is presented below. The complete details of the emissions inventory are
contained in Appendix F of Kentucky's 2005 submittal.
    Maximum allowable permitted emissions limits were used for the Boyd
County modeling demonstration. Using the maximum allowable emissions
limits (that are not expected to change) results in a current and a
future projected inventory which are the same. These emissions limits
are established in operating conditions contained in federally
enforceable permits. In addition, certain source-specific emissions
limits (discussed below) for the Calgon Carbon Corporation facility are
being incorporated, through this rulemaking, into the Kentucky SIP. Any
future increases in emissions and/or significant changes to the stack
configuration parameters from those that were modeled would be subject
to the Kentucky SIP's minor source New Source Review (NSR) and/or
Prevention of Deterioration (PSD) requirements, which include
demonstrating that the SO2 NAAQS and applicable PSD
increments are protected.
    The Commonwealth's air dispersion modeling was developed according
to EPA guidance at Appendix W of 40 CFR part 51: Guideline on Air
Quality Models (i.e. Modeling Guideline). The American Meteorological
Society (AMS)/United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Regulatory Model Improvement Committee (AERMIC) Model (AERMOD) was used
in the demonstration. The modeling system consists of 3 components:
AERMOD (the air dispersion model), the AERMOD meteorological
preprocessor (AERMET), and the AERMOD mapping program for processing
terrain and generating receptor elevations (AERMAP). The AERMOD
modeling system can be found on the Support Center for Regulatory
Models (SCRAM) Internet site, i.e. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/.

During the development of the redesignation modeling and at the time of
the submittal of the SIP and its supplement, AERMOD was not an EPA
regulatory model but was proposed to be included as a preferred EPA
model in the April 20, 2000 Federal Register (65 FR 21506). The
Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) requested approval for use of
the AERMOD model in a letter dated October 20, 2003, and EPA approved
the request in a letter to the Commonwealth dated November 12, 2003.
AERMOD was promulgated as a regulatory air dispersion model in the
November 9, 2005 Federal Register (70 FR 68218).
    Meteorological data used in this modeling demonstration consists
of: (1) Surface level date collected on-site at the Cooper School tower
near Catlettsburg, Kentucky, which is within the nonattainment area and
which has been supplemented with data from the Huntington/Tri-State
Airport National Weather Service (NWS) station as needed; and (2)
upper-air data from the Huntington/Tri-State Airport NWS station. These
meteorological data were prepared for use with AERMOD using the AERMET
preprocessor. As indicated in the emissions inventory discussion above,
significant SO2 emissions sources located within fifty km of
the nonattainment area were used in the modeling demonstration. Maximum
allowable and/or permitted SO2 emissions rates were used as
inputs to the model for each source specifically modeled.
    Compliance with the three averaging periods for the SO2
NAAQS (i.e., 3-hour, 24-hour and annual) was indicated in the modeling
demonstration. The model-predicted concentration, when added to the
background ambient air quality monitored concentrations, were less than
the three averaging periods. These modeling results for the three
averaging periods for the SO2 NAAQS are presented in Table 2
below. A more detailed discussion of the modeling demonstration is
included in the Kentucky SIP submittal, including the complete details
of all the modeling inputs and results.

             Table 2.--Summary of SO2 Modeling Results for Boyd County, Kentucky Nonattainment area
                                          [Micrograms per cubic meter]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percent of
                                      Maximum       Background                                         NAAQS
        Averaging period              modeled      concentration       Total         EPA NAAQS       standard
                                   concentration                                                     (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-hour..........................         1060.18           103.4         1163.58            1300            89.5
24-hour.........................          306.66            43.2          349.86             365            95.9
Annual..........................           66.1             11.0           77.1               80            96.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of both the monitoring and modeling data indicates
that attainment of the SO2 NAAQS has been demonstrated for
the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area.

2. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

    EPA has fully approved, under section 110(k) of the Act, the
applicable Kentucky SIP for the Boyd County SO2
nonattainment area. Following passage of the CAA of 1970, Kentucky has
adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved at various times,
provisions addressing the general SIP requirements set out in CAA
section 110 for all areas, including Boyd County. The historical record
of EPA's approval of Kentucky's SIP can be found at 40 CFR 52.920. In
addition, EPA is approving through this rulemaking, the Commonwealth's
attainment demonstration, maintenance plan, and source-specific SIP
revision related directly to the Boyd County SO2
nonattainment area. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request, see Calcagni Memo, p. 3 Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir.
1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See
also 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.

3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions

    EPA has determined that the improvement in air quality in the Boyd
County SO2 nonattainment area is due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions. Emissions inventories contained in the
attainment demonstration represent emissions limitations that are
federally enforceable because they are either SIP requirements or
permit limitations. For example, the primary sources of SO2
emissions in the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area,
Marathon Ashland's petroleum refinery and Calgon Carbon Corporation's
facility, are subject to SO2 limitations in permits that
have resulted in significant SO2 reductions that are
permanent and enforceable.
    Marathon Ashland's petroleum refinery reduced SO2
emissions by 24 percent in 1993 and these reductions were used in the
modeled attainment demonstration submitted by the Commonwealth in
conjunction with its redesignation request. In addition, the petroleum
refinery is subject to a 2001 Federal consent decree requiring
implementation of certain environmental measures, along with emissions
limitations and monitoring requirements which result, among other
things, in further SO2 emissions reductions from the
refinery. The consent decree requires that these further measures,
limitations, and monitoring requirements be incorporated into an
appropriate Federally enforceable permit and, pursuant to this
requirement, the Commonwealth issued a synthetic minor permit to
Marathon Ashland for the petroleum refinery in Catlettsburg on March
29, 2002. The synthetic minor permit incorporates the consent decree's
emissions limitations and other specified standards and measures for a
number of pollutants, including SO2, making them permanent
and enforceable.
    Calgon Carbon Corporation's facility in Catlettsburg is also
subject to SO2 emissions limitations and other reporting and
recordkeeping requirements that are permanent and enforceable. Those
limitations and requirements are contained in the facility's CAA title
V operating permit issued on August 21, 2000, and revised on March 1,
2004, and result in a total SO2 emissions decrease at the
facility of 1,439.67 tons per year (tpy). In addition to the facility's
title V permit, specified SO2 emissions points and their
corresponding SO2 emissions limits which are contained in
the Calgon Carbon Corporation title V permit are being, through this
rulemaking, incorporated into the Kentucky SIP as a source-specific SIP
revision. The specific SO2 emissions points and associated
SO2 emissions limits which are being incorporated into the
SIP are described in Table 3 below.

               Table 3.--SO2 Emission and Operating Caps Description for Calgon Carbon Corporation
                                            [Catlettsburg, Kentucky]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Calgon
  AERMOD  emmission      emmission    Affected facility        Title V permit  (V-00-015 R2) SO2 limitation
        point              point
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
57..................              12  B-Line Baker       0.0853 lb/mmBTU.
                                       Heater.
58..................              14  B-Line Activator.  2.88 lb/hr 12.6 tons/12 month period.
59..................              21  C-Line Activators  7.72 lb/hr 33.8 tons/12 month period.
62..................              31  D-Line Bakers....  15.0 lb/hr 65.7 tons/12 month period.
63..................              34  D-Line Activators  15 lb/hr 65.7 tons/12 month period.
64..................              32  D-Line Baker       0.0853 lb/mmBTU.
                                       Heater.
65..................              40  E-Line Baker       0.477 lb/mmBTU.
                                       Heater.
66..................              39  E-Line Bakers....  15.0 lb/hr 65.7 tons/12 month period.
67..................              42  E-Line Activators  7.5 lb/hr 32.85 tons/12 months each.
69..................              64  Package Boiler...  1.166 lb/mmBTU.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SO2 emissions reductions and emissions limitations
resulting from the permits and SIP revisions described above for these
existing sources support EPA's determination that the improvement in
air quality in the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area is due
to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. If a new source is
constructed or an existing source modified after EPA redesignates the
area to attainment, the air quality analyses required under Kentucky's
SIP-approved PSD program will ensure that such sources are permitted
with emissions limits at or below those needed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS and to protect all applicable
PSD increments.

4. The Commonwealth Has Met All Applicable Requirements for the Area
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA

    Section 110(a)(2) of the Act contains the general requirements for
nonattainment plans (enforceable emission limits, ambient monitoring,
permitting of new sources, adequate funding, etc.). Over the years, EPA
has approved Kentucky's SIP as meeting the basic requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2). See 40 CFR 52.920. In addition, through this
rulemaking, EPA is approving the attainment demonstration and
maintenance plan for the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area
and the source-specific SIP revision for Calgon Carbon Corporation's
facility (which incorporates specified SO2 emissions points
and their corresponding SO2 emissions limits into the
Kentucky SIP). Thus, the Commonwealth has met all applicable
requirements for the area under CAA section 110(a)(2).
    For redesignation, the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment
area must also meet all applicable requirements under part D of title I
of the Act. Part D contains the general provisions applicable to SIPs
for nonattainment areas. The planning requirements for SO2
nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 (CAA sections 171-179B)
and 5 (CAA sections 191-192) of part D of the Act. EPA issued guidance
in the General Preamble to title I of the CAA which describes our views
on how we will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under title I,
including those containing SO2 nonattainment and maintenance
area SIP provisions. See 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992). The General Preamble also discusses EPA's
interpretation of the

title I requirements and lists SO2 policy and guidance
documents.
    CAA sections 191 and 192 of subpart 5 address requirements for
SO2 nonattainment areas designated subsequent to enactment
of the 1990 CAA Amendments and areas lacking fully approved SIPs
immediately before enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments. The Boyd
County SO2 nonattainment area falls into neither of these
categories and is therefore subject to the general nonattainment
planning requirements of subpart 1 (CAA sections 171-179B). In
particular, CAA section 172 provides, among other requirements, that
SIPs must assure that reasonably available control measures (RACM)
(including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the
area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented as
expeditiously as practicable and shall provide for attainment. As noted
above, EPA is approving, through this rulemaking, the Commonwealth's
attainment demonstration (including the emissions inventory and
enforceable emissions limitations), maintenance plan, and source-
specific SIP revision related directly to the Boyd County
SO2 nonattainment area. The emissions inventory and
enforceable emissions reductions demonstrated in the Commonwealth's May
2005 submittal, along with the Commonwealth's maintenance plan and
source-specific SIP revision for Calgon Carbon Corporation's facility,
satisfy subpart 1's nonattainment planning requirements and provide for
attainment of the area.

5. The Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under Section 175A of
the CAA

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the necessary elements of a
maintenance plan needed for areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. The maintenance plan is required to be
approved as a SIP revision under section 110 of the CAA. Under section
175A(a) of the CAA, the maintenance plan must show that the NAAQS will
be maintained for at least ten years after EPA approves a redesignation
to attainment. The maintenance plan must also include contingency
measures to address any violation of the NAAQS.
    In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Boyd County
SO2 nonattainment area to attainment status, Kentucky
submitted a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
Boyd County for at least ten years after the effective date of
redesignation to attainment. The maintenance plan and associated
contingency measures are being approved in the SIP with this rulemaking
because it satisfies the requirements of CAA section 175A. The
emissions inventory and maintenance demonstration elements of this
maintenance plan are discussed above. The remaining major elements of
the plan are described below.
Continuation of the Monitoring Network
    Kentucky has indicated in the submitted maintenance plan that it
will continue to monitor SO2 in the Boyd County area in
accordance with 40 CFR parts 53 and 58 to verify continued attainment
of the SO2 NAAQS. The data will continue to be entered into
the Air Quality Subsystem of the Aerometric Information Retrieval
System.
Verification of Continued Attainment
    Kentucky has committed in the maintenance plan to review the
monitored data annually, and to review the local monitored
meteorological data. KDAQ will also assess compliance of local targeted
facilities to verify continued attainment of the area and will review
and update the annual emissions inventory for the Boyd County area at a
minimum of once every three years.
Contingency Plan
    Kentucky has indicated in its submitted maintenance plan that it
will rely on ambient air monitoring data in the Boyd County area to
track compliance with the SO2 NAAQS and to determine the
need to implement contingency measures. In the event that an exceedance
of the SO2 NAAQS occurs, KDAQ will expeditiously investigate
and determine the source(s) that caused the exceedance and/or
violation, and enforce any SIP or permit limit that is violated. In the
event that all sources are found to be in compliance with applicable
SIP and permit emission limits, KDAQ will perform the necessary
analysis to determine the cause(s) of the exceedance, and determine
what additional control measures are necessary to impose on the area=s
stationary sources to continue to maintain attainment of the
SO2 NAAQS. KDAQ will inform any affected stationary
source(s) of SO2 of the potential need for additional
control measures. If there is a violation of the SO2 NAAQS,
it will notify the stationary source(s) that the potential exists for a
NAAQS violation. Within six months, the source(s) must submit a
detailed plan of action specifying additional control measures to be
implemented no later than 18 months after the notification. The
additional control measures will be submitted to EPA for approval and
incorporation into the SIP.

IV. Final Actions

    EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Kentucky's request to
redesignate the Boyd County SO2 nonattainment area to
attainment because the redesignation request meets the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In addition, EPA is approving
Kentucky's maintenance plan for Boyd County as a SIP revision because
the plan meets the requirements of section 175A. Finally, EPA approving
the Commonwealth's source-specific SIP revision for Calgon Carbon
Corporation's Catlettsburg facility as detailed in Section III above.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal 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 these SIP revisions if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on July 24, 2006 without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 23, 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.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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.
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities.
Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources.
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 (Pub. L. 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 affects the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or
allow a state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. 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 and because the Agency does not have
reason to believe that the rule concerns an environmental health risk
or safety risk that may disproportionately affect children.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 CAA. Redesignation is an action that
affects the status of a geographical area but does not impose any new
requirements on sources. 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.).
    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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 24, 2006. 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 may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: May 12, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

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 S--Kentucky

0
2. Section 52.920 is amended:
0
(a) In paragraph (d) by adding a new entry at the end of the table for
``Calgon Carbon Corporation,'' and
0
(b) In paragraph (e) by adding a new entry at the end of the table for
``Ashland-Huntington Maintenance Plan,'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.920  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Kentucky Source-Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State         EPA approval
        Name of source              Permit No.     effective date         date                Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Calgon Carbon Corporation.....  V-00-015.........        05/13/05  05/24/06 [Insert   The only parts of the
                                                                    first page         permit being approved and
                                                                    number of          incorporated are the SO2
                                                                    publication].      emission limits from the
                                                                                following emissions
                                                                                points: 12, 14, 21, 31,
                                                                                34, 32, 40, 39, 42, and
                                                                                64.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Kentucky Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Applicable
  Name of non-regulatory SIP      geographic or         State
           provision              nonattainment    submittal date/ EPA approval date          Explanation
                                       area        effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Kentucky portion of the         Boyd County......        05/13/05  05/24/06 [Insert
 Ashland-Huntington Sulfur                                          first page
 Dioxide Maintenance Plan.                                          number of
                                                                    publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  81.318, the table entitled ``Kentucky SO2'' is
amended by revising the entry for ``That portion of Boyd County south
of UTM northing line 4251 km'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.318  Kentucky.

* * * * *

                                                  Kentucky--SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Does not meet     Does not meet
        Designated area              primary          secondary        Cannot be         Better than national
                                    standards         standards        classified              standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
That portion of Boyd County     .................  ..............  .................  X
 south of UTM northing line
 4251km.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-4820 Filed 5-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 140 (Thursday, July 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 43743]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18319]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2011-0127]

Pipeline Safety: Meetings of the Technical Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee and the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee

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

ACTION: Notice; Announcement of Meeting Location and Date Change.

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

SUMMARY: In a Federal Register notice published on May 20, 2011, (76 FR
29333) PHMSA announced that the Technical Pipeline Safety Standards
Committee (TPSSC) and the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee (THLPSSC) would meet on August 2-3, 2011, from 9
a.m. to 5 p.m. The meeting dates have been changed. The TPSSC and the
THLPSSC will now meet on August 2, 2011, only, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
The meeting will be held at The Weston Arlington Gateway, 801 North
Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22203.
    Please refer to the May 20, 2011, (76 FR 29333) notice for more
details about the meeting. The TPSSC and THLPSSC will consider a draft
pipeline safety report to the nation. The meeting will be open to the
public.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60115; 60118.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 14, 2011.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-18319 Filed 7-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 19, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 46833]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17006]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0645]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; State Boat Channel, Captree
Island, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Captree State Parkway Bridge across
the State Boat Channel, mile 30.7 at Captree Island, New York. This
deviation is necessary to allow the bridge owner to perform painting
and steel repairs.

DATES: This deviation is effective from September 6, 2016 to December
16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-0645] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
temporary deviation, call or email Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer,
First Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    The Captree State Parkway Bridge, mile 30.7, across the State Boat
Channel, has a vertical clearance in the closed position of 29 feet at
mean high water and 30 feet at mean low water. The existing bridge
operating regulations are found at 33 CFR 117.799(i).
    The waterway is transited by seasonal recreational traffic.
    New York State DOT, the owner of the bridge, requested a temporary
deviation from the normal operating schedule to perform painting and
steel repairs.
    Under this temporary deviation, the Captree State Parkway Bridge
will not open for marine traffic from September 6, 2016 to December 16,
2016.
    Vessels able to pass under the bridge in the closed position may do
so at anytime. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies and
there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass.
    The Coast Guard will inform the users of the waterways through our
Local Notice and Broadcast to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessel operations can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 14, 2016.
C.J. Bisignano,
Supervisory Bridge Management Specialist, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-17006 Filed 7-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 72)]
[Notices]
[Page 19497-19501]
[DOCID:fr14ap06-39]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[FERC Docket No. PF06-15-000 and BLM Reference No. 2880/UTU-82750 and
WYW-67229]

Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment And Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment for the
Proposed Kanda Lateral and Mainline Expansion Project, Request for
Comments on Environmental Issues, Notice of Public Scoping Meetings,
and Notice of Site Visit

April 7, 2006.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd's.
(WIC) planned Kanda Lateral and Mainline Expansion Project located in
Uintah and Daggett Counties, Utah and Sweetwater County, Wyoming. This
notice explains the scoping process that will be used to gather input
from the public and interested agencies on the project. Your input will
help the Commission staff determine which issues need to be evaluated
in the EA. Please note that the scoping period for the project will
close on May 19, 2006.
    In lieu of or in addition to sending written comments, you are
invited to attend the public scoping meetings that have been scheduled
in the project area. These meetings are scheduled for April 24, 2006 in
Rock Springs, Wyoming and April 25, 2006 in Vernal, Utah. Further
instructions on how to submit written comments and additional details
of the public scoping meetings are provided in the public participation
section of this notice.
    The FERC will be the lead federal agency for the preparation of the
EA. The document will satisfy the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will be used by the FERC to
consider the environmental impacts that could result if it issues WIC a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under section 7 of the
Natural Gas Act.

    The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) is participating as a cooperating agency in the preparation of
the EA because the project would cross Federal land under the
jurisdiction of the Vernal Field Office in Utah and the Rock Springs
Field Office in Wyoming.
    Under section 185(f) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the BLM
has the authority to issue Right-of-Way Grants for all affected federal
lands. This would be in accordance with Title 43 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) parts 2800 and 2880, subsequent 2800 and 2880
Manuals, and Handbook 2801-1. As a cooperating agency, the BLM would
adopt the EA to meet its NEPA responsibilities in considering WIC's
application for a Right-of-Way Grant and obtain a Temporary Use Permit
for the portion of the project on federal land. The BLM will also use
the EA to consider amending the Green River Resource Management Plan
(RMP). Additional discussion of the BLM's plan amendment process is
presented later in this notice.
    With this notice, the staffs of the FERC and BLM (Agency Staffs)
are asking other Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies with
jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental
issues/impacts to participate as cooperating agencies in the
preparation of the EA. These agencies may choose to participate once
they have evaluated WIC's proposal relative to their responsibilities.
Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow
the instructions for filing comments described later in this notice.
    This notice is being sent to affected landowners; Federal, state,
and local government agencies and elected officials; environmental and
public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested
parties; and local libraries and newspapers. The Agency Staffs
encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of
this planned project and encourage them to comment on their areas of
concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a WIC representative about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. WIC would
seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. If the project is
approved by the Commission, that approval conveys with it the right of
eminent domain. Therefore, in the event easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, WIC could initiate condemnation proceedings in
accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility on My land? What Do I Need to Know?'' is available for
viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov). This fact

sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the
use of eminent domain and how to participate in the FERC's proceedings.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    The Kanda Lateral \1\ would be comprised of about 124.5 miles of
20- or 24-inch-diameter pipeline beginning at the new Kerr-McGee
Interconnect/Meter Station located in Uintah County, Utah. The pipeline
would extend in a northerly direction through Daggett County, Utah and
interconnect with WIC's mainline at the proposed Kanda Interconnect/
Meter Station in Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Along the pipeline route,
WIC would interconnect with two interstate pipelines, at the new
Northwest Pipeline Interconnect/Meter Station and at the Clay Basin
Storage Field Interconnect/Meter Station. In addition, WIC would
construct various block valves and pig \2\ launcher and receiver
facilities. The Kanda Lateral pipeline facilities would be designed to
deliver up to 225,000,000 Dth/d (decatherms per day) of gas into WIC's
mainline. The majority of the pipeline route would parallel an existing
Questar/Mapco Pipeline corridor. As part of the Mainline Expansion, WIC
would install two compressor units totaling 12,824 horsepower at the
existing Colorado Interstate Gas Company's Wamsutter Compressor Station
located in Sweetwater County, Wyoming. A map depicting WIC's proposed
facilities is provided in Appendix 1.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A lateral pipeline is a pipeline which branches away from
the central or primary part of the pipeline system.
    \2\ A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry
a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion.
    \3\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not eing
printed in the Federal Register. Copies are available on the
Commission's Web site (excluding the map) at the ``eLibrary'' link
or from the Commission's Public Reference Room or call (202) 502-
8371. For instructions on connecting to ``eLibrary'' refer to the
end of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    WIC anticipates filing an application with the FERC in August 2006.
If the Commission authorizes its project, WIC plans to begin
construction in June 2007 to give it the opportunity to place the
facilities in service by the fall of 2007.
    The majority (70 percent) of WIC's proposed project would be on BLM
lands.

Land Requirements

    Construction of WIC's proposed pipeline and aboveground facilities
would require about 2,219.6 acres of land, including the nominal
construction right-of-way, temporary extra workspaces, pipe and
contractor yards, staging areas, access roads, and aboveground
facilities. Following construction, about 766.5 acres would be retained
by WIC for operation of the pipeline and aboveground facilities. The
remaining 1,453.1 acres would be restored and allowed to revert to its
former use.
    WIC is proposing an 85-foot-wide nominal construction right-of-way
between milepost (MP) 0.0 and MP 82.4 and a 100-foot-wide nominal
construction right-of-way between MP 82.4 and MP 124.5; with proposed
temporary extra workspaces at site-specific locations to accommodate
for rugged and steep terrain, side sloping, road, wetland, waterbody,
and foreign pipeline crossings. Also, WIC proposes a 20-foot wide,
ungraded area adjacent to the construction right-of-way to be used for
placement of cut brush and limbs that are to be returned to the right-
of-way after the pipe is installed. WIC would retain a 50-foot-wide
permanent right-of-way for the pipeline.
    The interconnect/meter stations would require about 0.7 acre each
of land for operation, with additional temporary extra workspaces for
construction. The Kerr-McGee Station site would house measuring and
communication facilities, a pig launcher, and block valve. The
Northwest Station site would house measuring and communication
facilities. The Clay Basin Station site would house measuring and
communication facilities, a pig launcher and receiver, and block valve.
The Kanda Station would house measuring and communication facilities, a
pig receiver, and block valve.
    The block valves, that are not enclosed within a meter station
site, would be located within a 45-foot by 75-foot (0.07 acre) fenced
enclosure within the limits of the permanent right-of-way.
    The two compressor units would be installed within the existing
Wamsutter Compressor Station fenced property and would not require
additional land.

The EA Process

    NEPA requires the FERC to take into account the environmental
impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the
issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. The BLM
is required to consider the environmental impacts from a project

that requires BLM Right-of-Way Grants and/or Temporary Use Permits. The
EA will give the Agency Staffs the information needed to do that.
    Although no formal application has yet been filed with the FERC,
the Agency Staffs have begun the environmental review of the project in
accordance with the FERC's Pre-Filing Process. The purpose of the Pre-
Filing Process is to seek public and agency input early in the project
planning phase and encourage involvement by interested stakeholders to
allow for the early identification and resolution of environmental
issues/impacts. The Agency Staffs will work with all interested
stakeholders to identify and attempt to address issues/impacts before
WIC files its application with the FERC.
    The Agency Staffs have already started to meet with WIC,
jurisdictional agencies, and other interested stakeholders to discuss
the project and identify issues/impacts and concerns. On April 4, 5,
and 6, 2006, the Agency Staffs participated in public open houses
sponsored by WIC in the project area to explain the environmental
review process to interested stakeholders and take comments about the
project. On April 6, 2006, the Agency Staffs conducted an interagency
scoping meeting in the project area to solicit comments and concerns
from agencies having jurisdiction over the project. By this notice, the
Agency Staffs are formally announcing the preparation of the EA and
requesting agency and public comments to help focus the analysis in the
EA on the potentially significant environmental issues/impacts related
to the proposed action.
    The Agency Staffs' independent analysis of the issues/impacts will
be included in the EA. The EA will also include possible alternatives
to the proposed project or portions of the project, and we will make
recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various
resource areas of concern. Depending on the comments received during
the scoping process, the EA may be published and mailed to federal,
state, and local government agencies and elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; other interested parties;
affected landowners; Native American tribes; newspapers and local
libraries; and the Commission's official service list for this
proceeding. A 30-day comment period will be allotted for review of the
EA. We will consider all comments submitted on the EA in any Commission
Order that is issued for the project.

The BLM's Plan Amendment Process

    The BLM will also use the EA to consider amending the Green River
RMP. Publication of this notice formally initiates the plan amendment
process and begins the scoping process. There are potential alternative
routes that cross BLM-administered lands currently excluded to rights-
of-way. The EA will consider reasonable alternatives including those
that would cross these excluded areas. Therefore, for the proposed
project, the EA will be used by the BLM to consider amending the
current Green River RMP (August 1997), which would be necessary for any
pipeline construction within the excluded areas.
    BLM regulations in Title 43 CFR part 1600 and the NEPA process
detailed in the Council on Environmental Quality regulations in Title
40 CFR parts 1500-1508 guide preparation of plan amendments. The
process is tailored to the anticipated level of public interest and
potential for significant impacts.
    Plan amendments (see Title 43 CFR 1610.5-5) change one or more of
the terms, conditions, or decisions of an approved land use plan. These
decisions may include those relating to desired outcomes; measures to
achieve desired outcomes, including resource restrictions; or land
tenure decisions. Plan amendments are required to consider any proposal
or action that does not conform to the plan.
    An applicant may request that the BLM amend the land use plan to
allow an otherwise non-conforming proposal. The amendment and any
implementation actions (i.e., granting the right-of-way and temporary
use permit) may be considered together. Separate decisions will be
issued for the right-of-way and, if necessary, the plan amendment.
    Additional information regarding the plan amendment process can be
found in the BLM's Land Use Planning Handbook (http://www.blm.gov/nhp/200/wo210/landuse_hb.pdf
).

    Planning criteria guide development of the plan amendment by
helping define the decision space (or the ``sideboards'') of the
planning effort; they are based on applicable laws, Director and State
Director guidance, and the results of public and governmental
participation (43 CFR 1610.4-2).
    Planning criteria include but are not limited to the following:
     The plan amendment will be completed in compliance with
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), NEPA, and all other
relevant Federal laws, Executive orders, and management policies of the
BLM.
     Where existing planning decisions are still valid, those
decisions may remain unchanged and be incorporated into the amendment.
     The plan amendment will recognize valid existing rights.
     Native American Tribal consultations will be conducted in
accordance with policy and Tribal concerns will be given due
consideration.
     Maintaining the relevant and important values of the
Greater Red Creek Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC).
     Wyoming BLM Mitigation Guidelines.
     Standards for Healthy Rangelands.
     Criteria for Areas of Critical Environmental Concern.
     Criteria for interim management of Wilderness Study Areas.
    Criteria for alternative formulation include:
     Intensive management of cultural and historic resources,
including rock art occurrences, historic trails, and Native American
respected places.
     Providing for various types and levels of vegetation uses,
including wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and livestock
grazing.
     Providing for authorizing rights-of-way, off-highway
vehicle (OHV) use, and other activities that may result in surface
disturbance.
     Modification of right-of-way concentration areas,
exclusion areas, and avoidance areas to provide for development needs
and protection of resource values.
     Providing varying protection levels for unique and
nonrenewable geological, cultural, paleontological, and recreational
values.
     Management options for protecting or enhancing wetlands
and riparian areas.
     Providing varying protection levels and for enhancement of
habitat for sensitive or important wildlife and plant species,
including protection of key elk and deer habitat and Colorado River
Cutthroat trout habitat.
    Effects criteria to identify and analyze environmental consequences
include:
     Effects of surface disturbing land uses and other
disruptive human activities on air quality, visual resources, cultural
resources, recreational opportunities, watershed, and wildlife
resources.
     Effects caused by OHV use or restrictions on OHV use.
     Effects of fencing on wildlife movement and migration.
     Effects of all types of land and resource uses on the
vegetation resource.

     Economic impacts of land use restrictions on economic
sectors that are heavily dependent on the use of public lands and
resources.
    Criteria for selection of a potential plan amendment: Answers to
the following questions will be used to guide selection of the
potential amendment.
     Does/Do the alternatives meet guidelines for reduction of
sedimentation and salinity, as stated in water quality plans of the
State of Wyoming and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and
Colorado River Salinity Control Act?
     What levels of land use restrictions are needed to provide
adequate protection of resource values?
     Do the alternatives retain reasonable accessibility of
public lands for purposes of public access, public land use, and
resource development?
     Are the alternatives consistent with plans, programs, and
policies of other Federal agencies, state and local governments, and
Indian tribes?
     Are the alternatives consistent with the objectives
established in the Green River RMP?
     Are relevant and important values of the Greater Red Creek
ACEC maintained?
     Are sensitive species being protected or their habitat
enhanced?

Currently Identified Environmental Issues/Impacts

    The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project. The Agency Staffs
have already identified issues/impacts that deserve attention based on
a preliminary review of the proposed facilities, the environmental
information provided by WIC, and comments received to date. This
preliminary list of issues/impacts may be changed based on your
comments and the additional analysis of the Agency Staffs.
     Geology and Soils:

--Assessment of potential geological hazards.
--Desert construction and erosion control.
--Right-of-way restoration and revegetation in an arid environment.
--Evaluation of noxious weed control.
--Need for a rock disposal plan.
--Construction in steep terrain, including blasting.

     Water Resources:

--Impact of dry crossings of irrigation canals and drains.
--Impact of open-cut crossings of dry washes.
--Impact on wetland hydrology and assessment of wetland mitigation
options.
--Effect of pipeline crossings on perennial and intermittent
waterbodies.

     Fish, Wildlife, and Vegetation
--Effect on sensitive fisheries.
--Effect on wildlife resources and their habitat.
--Effect on riparian vegetation.

     Special Status Species:

--Potential effect on federally listed or proposed species.
--Potential effect on state-listed sensitive species.
--BLM sensitive species.

     Cultural Resources:

--Effect on historic and prehistoric sites.
--Native American and tribal concerns.

     Land Use, Recreation and Special Interest Areas, and
Visual Resources:

--Evaluation of the current right-of-way concentration area through the
Greater Red Creek ACEC.
--Visual impacts.

Public Participation

    You are encouraged to become involved in this process and provide
your specific comments or concerns about WIC's proposal. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To
expedite the Agency Staffs' receipt and consideration of your comments,
electronic submission of comments is strongly encouraged. See Title 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the FERC Internet Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the eFiling link and the link to the

User's Guide. Before you can submit comments you will need to create a
free account by clicking on ``Sign-up'' under ``New User''. You will be
asked to select the type of submission you are making. This type of
submission is considered ``Comment on Filing''. Comments submitted
electronically must be submitted by May 19, 2006.
    If you wish to mail comments, please mail your comments so that
they will be received in Washington, DC on or before May 19, 2006 and
carefully follow these instructions:
     Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Magalie
R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas
Branch 1; DG2E;
     Reference Docket No. PF06-15-000 on the original and both
copies.
    The public scoping meetings are designed to provide another
opportunity to offer comments on the proposed project. Interested
groups and individuals are encouraged to attend the meetings and to
present comments on the environmental issues/impacts they believe
should be addressed in the EA. A transcript of the meetings will be
generated so that your comments will be accurately recorded. Meetings
will begin at 7 p.m. (m.d.t.), and are scheduled as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Date                               Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, April 24, 2006....................  Holiday Inn, 1675 Sunset
                                             Drive, Rock Springs, WY
                                             82901,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006...................  Western Park--Convention
                                             Center, 300 East 200 South,
                                             Vernal, UT 84078, (435) 789-
                                             7396.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Site Visit

    On April 25 and 26, 2006, the Agency Staffs will conduct a site
visit of the planned Kanda Lateral and Mainline Expansion Project.
    We will view the proposed route and variations that are being
considered for the planned pipeline. Agency Staffs will travel during
this visit by automobile and on foot. Representatives of WIC will
accompany the Agency Staffs.
    All interested parties may attend the site visit on both days.
Those planning to attend must provide their own transportation. If you
are interested in attending the site visits, please meet us at 9 a.m.on
April 25 in the parking lot of the Holiday Inn, 1675 Sunset Drive, Rock
Springs, WY for the Wyoming portion of the project, and at 9 a.m.on
April 26 in the parking lot of the Best Western Antlers, 423 West Main,
Vernal, UT for the Utah portion of the project.
    For additional information, please contact the Commission's Office
of External Affairs at 1-866-208-FERC (3372).

Environmental Mailing List

    If you received this notice, you are on the environmental mailing
list for this project and will continue to receive project updates
including the EA. If you want your contact information corrected or you
do not want to remain on our mailing list, please return the Correct or
Remove From Mailing List Form included as Appendix 2.

Availability of Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208 FERC (3372) or on
the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary

link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'', and
enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket
Number field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link on the FERC Internet Web site
also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.
    In addition, the FERC now offers a free service called
eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and
submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you
spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. To register for this service, go to the eSubscription
link on the FERC Internet Web site.
    Information concerning the proposed land use plan amendment and the
involvement of the BLM in the EA and plan amendment process may be
obtained from Mark Mackiewicz, PMP, Project Manager, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Finally, WIC will be setting up a publicly available Web site for
its project. The Web site will include a description of the project,
responses to frequently asked questions, and other appropriate project-
related information. WIC will continually update its Web site with
information about the project. WIC has designated the following
individual as the single point of contact for stakeholder communication
for this project: Mr. David R. Anderson, Manager, Land Department,
Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd., Two North Nevada Avenue, Colorado
Springs, Colorado 80903, Telephone 1-877-598-5263, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-5557 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:

Dear Mr. Zeller:

Leave the e-cigarette industry (and consumers) alone. This industry does not need regulation. All the ingredients in these nicotine liquids have already been deemed safe by the FDA. If there ever were an unsafe product, the market would take care of the one responsible for it, and that would be the end of it. There is too much regulation in this country. And to regulate e-cigarettes, which are 99% safer than tobacco cigarettes, is just absurd. I appreciate your interest in mine and society's personal health and well-being, but I think I/we can manage our own lives just fine on our own, thank you.

But until then, the point of my letter today, as an individual consumer, is to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, they helped me quit a 35 year smoking addiction and I have never felt better in my life. My health is coming back, I have more energy, I could breathe easier, and the constant sore throat I had has vanished.

I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42021-42022]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17382]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

Stage 3 Compliance for Jets Weighing 75,000 Pounds or Less After
December 31, 2015

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice reminding operators of noise compliance deadline.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is reminding operators of
jet airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or less that after December 31,
2015, operations in the contiguous United States may be conducted only
with airplanes that comply with at least Stage 3 noise levels.
Operators that fail to meet this requirement may be subject to civil
penalties. Certain operations of airplanes not meeting Stage 3 may be
conducted under special flight authorizations granted by the FAA on a
case by case basis.

DATES: Compliance is due after December 31, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding this restriction
and its applicability may be directed to Rebecca Cointin AEE-100,
Office of Environment and Energy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
4770; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For legal questions, contact
Karen Petronis, AGC-220, Regulations Division, Office of the Chief
Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The noise from smaller jet airplanes continues to have an impact on
communities near airports. In recognition of this impact, Congress
addressed the operations of these airplanes in Section 506 of the FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. That section states: ``[A]fter
December 31, 2015, a person may not operate a civil subsonic jet
airplane with a maximum weight of 75,000 pounds or less, and for which
an airworthiness certificate (other than an experimental certificate)
has been issued, to or from an airport in the United States unless the
Secretary of Transportation finds that the aircraft complies with
[S]tage 3 noise levels.'' Stage 3 noise levels are the certificated
noise levels as established in 14 CFR part 36.
    In 2013, the FAA codified this statutory requirement as Sec.
91.881. The prohibition applies to all civil operations in the 48
contiguous United States regardless of purpose (except for those
airplanes that have an experimental airworthiness certificate). The law
also provides for operation of otherwise prohibited airplanes after
that date under certain circumstances. The authorized purposes were
codified in Sec.  91.883, which includes the procedure for applying for
a special flight authorization from the FAA.
    Operators of airplanes that do not comply with Stage 3 noise levels
may

choose to replace them, or to incorporate noise-reduction technologies
that may be available to make the airplanes Stage 3 noise compliant.
Operators that continue to fly non-compliant airplanes after December
31, 2015, will be subject to applicable civil penalties.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 10, 2015.
Lourdes Maurice,
Director, Office of Environment and Energy.
[FR Doc. 2015-17382 Filed 7-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P