[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68630-68632]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24927]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31454; Amdt. No. 4031]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPS) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain
airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption
of new or revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective November 16, 2022. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of November 16, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30. 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Information Services, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected] or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center at nfdc.faa.gov to
register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg. 29 Room 104, Oklahoma
City, OK 73169. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends 14 CFR part 97 by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums
and/or ODPS. The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its
associated Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed
on FAA form documents which are incorporated by reference in this
amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20.
The applicable FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, 8260-15B,
when required by an entry on 8260-15A, and 8260-15C.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex
nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use
the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead
refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers or
aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by
reference are realized and publication of the complete description of
each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the typed of SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their
applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport
and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPS, Takeoff
Minimums and/or ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for Part
97 of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and

textual ODP amendments may have been issued previously by the FAA in a
Flight Data Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency
action of immediate flights safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less
than 30 days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest and, where applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d),
good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 14, 2022.
Thomas J Nichols,
Aviation Safety, Flight Standards Service, Manager, Standards Section,
Flight Procedures & Airspace Group, Flight Technologies & Procedures
Division.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 1 December 2022

Winter Haven, FL, KGIF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1F
Winter Haven, FL, KGIF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 11, Orig-C
Winter Haven, FL, KGIF, VOR-A, Amdt 7C

Effective 29 December 2022

Healy, AK, Healy River, HEALY TWO, Graphic DP
Healy, AK, PAHV, RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1
Healy, AK, PAHV, RNAV (GPS)-A, Amdt 1
Sitka, AK, PASI, LDA RWY 11, Amdt 16
Carlisle, AR, 4M3, VOR RWY 9, Amdt 2D, CANCELLED
Washington, DC, KHEF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16L, Amdt 2
Washington, DC, KHEF, RNAV (GPS) RWY 16R, Amdt 2
Miami, FL, KMIA, ILS OR LOC RWY 9, Amdt 11A
Pensacola, FL, KPNS, VOR RWY 8, Amdt 4D
Atlanta, GA, KCCO, ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 1
Lafayette, GA, 9A5, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 3
Lafayette, GA, 9A5, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 3
Statesboro, GA, KTBR, ILS OR LOC RWY 32, Amdt 4
Statesboro, GA, KTBR, RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig
Statesboro, GA, KTBR, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 4
Bloomfield, IA, 4K6, NDB RWY 36, Amdt 3B, CANCELLED
Bloomington/Normal, IL KBMI, ILS OR LOC RWY 2, Orig-E
Bloomington/Normal, IL, KBMI, ILS OR LOC RWY 20, ILS RWY 20 (CAT
II), Amdt 3C
Bloomington/Normal, IL, KBMI, ILS OR LOC RWY 29, Amdt 11C
Bloomington/Normal, IL, KBMI, LOC BC RWY 11, Amdt 12
Prestonsburg, KY, Big Sandy Rgnl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Nantucket, MA, KACK, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4
Sturgis, MI, KIRS, NDB RWY 19, Amdt 6A
Sturgis, MI, KIRS, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig-B
Sturgis, MI, KIRS, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 1C
Sturgis, MI, KIRS, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4A
Austin, MN, KAUM, VOR RWY 17, Amdt 3, CANCELLED
Louisville, MS, KLMS, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 3
Louisville, MS, KLMS, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 3
Louisville, MS, KLMS, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3
Billings, MT, KBIL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 2C
Lincoln, NE, KLNK, ILS Y OR LOC Y RWY 36, Amdt 11L
Teterboro, NJ, KTEB, VOR RWY 24, Orig-F, CANCELLED
Teterboro, NJ, KTEB, VOR/DME RWY 6, Orig-F, CANCELLED
Teterboro, NJ, KTEB, VOR/DME-B, Amdt 2F, CANCELLED
Vineland, NJ, 29N, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1A,
CANCELLED
Vineland, NJ, 29N, VOR OR GPS-B, Orig-A, CANCELLED
Lancaster, NY, KBQR, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig
Lancaster, NY, KBQR, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig
Lancaster, NY, KBQR, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig
New York, NY, KJFK, ILS OR LOC RWY 4L, Amdt 11E
New York, NY, KJFK, ILS OR LOC RWY 13L, ILS RWY 13L (CAT II), Amdt
18D
Van Wert, OH, KVNW, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-A
Van Wert, OH, KVNW, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A
Sterling, PA, 70N, RNAV (GPS)-A, Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Sterling, PA, 70N, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1,
CANCELLED
Sterling, PA, 70N, VOR/DME-B, Orig, CANCELLED
Anderson, SC, KAND, ILS OR LOC RWY 5, Amdt 2
Anderson, SC, KAND, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 2
Anderson, SC, KAND, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 3
Greenwood, SC, KGRD, VOR RWY 9, Amdt 14, CANCELLED
Newberry, SC, KEOE, NDB RWY 22, Amdt 6D
Madisonville, TN, KMNV, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 2D
El Paso, TX, KELP, ILS OR LOC RWY 22, Amdt 33
El Paso, TX, KELP, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 22, Amdt 1
Greenville, TX, KGVT, ILS Y OR LOC Y RWY 17, Amdt 1B
Greenville, TX, KGVT, ILS Z OR LOC Z RWY 17, Amdt 9
Greenville, TX, KGVT, TACAN RWY 17, Orig-C
Sulphur Springs, TX, KSLR, VOR-B, Amdt 7A, CANCELLED
Port Angeles, WA, KNOW, COPTER NDB 242, Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Appleton, WI, KATW, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 2E
Medford, WI, KMDZ, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 1A
Merrill, WI, KRRL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1D

Merrill, WI, KRRL, RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1C
Afton, WY, KAFO, RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Amdt 4

[FR Doc. 2022-24927 Filed 11-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 193 (Friday, October 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53138-53139]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21673]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-191-000]

Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment for the
Texas Eastern Transmission Company, L.P. Proposed Bernville Compressor
Units Replacement Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the
Bernville Compressor Units Replacement Project, proposed by Texas
Eastern Transmission, L.P. (Texas Eastern) in the above-referenced
docket. Texas Eastern requests authorization to replace two existing
natural gas-fired turbine compressor engines and appurtenant facilities
at its existing Bernville Compressor Station in Berks, Pennsylvania.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Bernville Compressor Units
Replacement Project in accordance with the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The FERC staff concludes that approval of the
proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not
constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    The project would consist of the following new facilities:
     Installation of one 26,000 horsepower (hp) and one 18,100
hp Solar Turbine Inc. natural gas-fired centrifugal turbine compressor
units and associated auxiliary piping and equipment;
     installation of related software controls that would limit
the total hp of the 26,000 hp compressor unit to 23,700 hp;
     conversion of an existing 3,070-square-foot compressor
unit building to an office building; and
     other related appurtenances.
    The project would involve removing one 22,000 hp and one 19,800 hp
natural gas-fired centrifugal turbine compressor unit and the
associated auxiliary piping and equipment. Texas Eastern would also
remove the 4,352-square-foot building, which houses the existing 22,000
hp compressor unit, to allow for the installation of an 11,780-square-
foot building to house the two new replacement compressor units. The
replacement activities would require the use of additional temporary
workspace beyond the existing facility boundary.
    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to
federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies;
elected officials; Native American tribes; potentially affected
landowners and other interested individuals and groups, including
commenters; and newspapers and libraries in the project area. The EA is
only available in electronic format. It may be viewed and downloaded
from FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the Environmental Documents page
(https://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/enviro/eis.asp). In addition, the
EA may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website.
Click on the eLibrary link (https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp), click on General Search, and enter the docket number in
the ``Docket Number'' field, excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP19-191). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments
should focus on the EA's disclosure and discussion of 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 ensure that the Commission has the
opportunity to consider your comments prior to making its decision on
this project, it is important that we receive your comments in
Washington, DC on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 31, 2019.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments with the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting
brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP19-191-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Any person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a
motion to intervene pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedures (18 Code of Federal Regulations 385.214).
Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp. Only intervenors have the right
to seek rehearing or judicial review of the Commission's decision. The
Commission may grant affected landowners and others with environmental
concerns intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which no other
party can adequately represent. Simply filing environmental comments
will not give you intervenor status, but you do not need intervenor
status to have your comments considered.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link
also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription, which 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. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.

    Dated: September 30, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-21673 Filed 10-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64453-64455]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22600]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No.CP16-488-000]

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Gulf Coast
Expansion Project, and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Gulf Coast Expansion Project
involving construction and operation of facilities by Natural Gas
Pipeline Company of America, LLC (Natural) in Cass and Wharton
Counties, Texas. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making
process to determine whether the Project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. You can make a difference by providing us with
your specific comments or concerns about the project. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.
Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they
need to evaluate in the EA. To ensure that your comments are timely and
properly recorded, please send your comments so that the Commission
receives them in Washington, DC on or before October 14, 2016.
    If you sent comments on this project to the Commission before the
opening of this docket on August 1, 2016, you will need to file those
comments in Docket No. CP16-488-000 to ensure they are considered as
part of this proceeding.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if
the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the
right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with
state law.
    Natural provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC
entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I
Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Public Participation

    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has expert staff available to assist you at
(202) 502-8258 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to

Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for submitting brief,
text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' If you are filing a comment on a particular project,
please select ``Comment on a Filing'' as the filing type; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address. Be sure to reference the project docket number
(CP16-488-000) with your submission: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426.

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Natural proposes to construct and operate a new compressor station,
identified as Compressor Station 394 (CS 394), and a new approximately
4,000-foot-long, 30-inch-diameter lateral, with connections to
Natural's existing Gulf Coast Line and A/G Line in Cass County, Texas.
Natural is also requesting authorization to abandon two compressor
units at its Compressor Station 301 (CS 301) located in Wharton County,
Texas. The Project would provide about 460,000 dekatherms of
incremental southbound transportation capacity from existing receipt
points on Natural's Gulf Coast System to delivery points in Natural's
South Texas Zone.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 39.9
acres of land for the aboveground facilities and the pipeline.
Following construction, Natural would maintain about 27.3 acres for
permanent operation of the project's facilities. The remaining 12.6
acres would only be used for construction and be allowed to revegetate.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission 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. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:

     geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species;
     public safety; and
     cumulative impacts.

    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record through eLibrary (for directions
on the use of eLibrary, please see the additional page 6). Depending on
the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish
and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We
will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations
to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and
address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the
Public Participation section, beginning on page 2.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\3\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable Texas State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO),
and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies,
interested agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the
project's potential effects on historic properties.\4\ We will define
the project-specific Area of Potential Effects (APE) in consultation
with the SHPO as the project develops. On natural gas facility
projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground
disturbance (examples include construction right-of-way, contractor/
pipe storage yards, compressor stations, and access roads). Our EA for
this project will document our findings on the impacts on historic
properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    Copies of the EA will be sent to the environmental mailing list for
public review and comment. If you would prefer to receive a paper copy
of the document instead of the CD version or would like to remove your
name from

the mailing list, please return the attached Information Request
(appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene.
    Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in the ``Document-less
Intervention Guide'' under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's
Web site. Motions to intervene are more fully described at http://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at 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 (i.e., CP16-
488-000). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which 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. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: September 14, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-22600 Filed 9-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 12, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44237-44244]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14645]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2023-0219; FRL-8813-01-R3]

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; Liberty Borough Area Second 10-
Year PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the Liberty Borough area second 10-year maintenance plan
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection (PADEP or Commonwealth) on behalf of the
Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD). This plan addresses the
second 10-year maintenance period after redesignation for particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10
micrometers (PM10). A limited maintenance plan (LMP) is used
to meet the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements for formerly
designated nonattainment areas that meet certain qualification
criteria. EPA is proposing to determine that ACHD's second maintenance
plan meets applicable CAA requirements. The plan relies upon control
measures contained in the attainment plan and the first 10-year
maintenance plan and the determination that the Liberty Borough area
currently monitors PM10 levels well below the
PM10 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
standard).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 11, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2023-0219 at www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Four Penn Center, 1600
John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19103. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Schmitt can also be
reached via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 21, 2021, EPA received from PADEP,
on behalf of ACHD, a revision to the Commonwealth's state
implementation plan (SIP) for the Liberty Borough area.\1\ The Liberty
Borough area is comprised of the Boroughs of Liberty, Lincoln, Port
Vue, and Glassport and the City of Clairton in Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania. This action is expected to ensure that the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania meets CAA requirements. There is no information on the
record indicating that this action is expected to have
disproportionately high or adverse human health or environmental
effects on a particular group of people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In its SIP submission, ACHD refers to the area at issue as
the Liberty-Clairton area. In this proposed rulemaking, EPA refers
to this area as the Liberty Borough area to distinguish it from the
Liberty-Clairton fine particulate matter (PM2.5) area and
to be consistent with what the Agency called the area in our
approval of the first 10-year maintenance plan and attainment plan.
See 63 FR 47343 (September 8, 1998) and 68 FR 53515 (September 11,
2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    On July 1, 1987, EPA promulgated two primary standards for
PM10: A 24-hour standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter
([micro]g/m\3\) and an annual standard of 50 [micro]g/m\3\. EPA also
promulgated secondary PM10 standards that were identical to
the primary standards.\2\ Effective December 18, 2006, EPA revoked the
annual PM10 standards but retained the 24-hour standards.\3\
In this document, references to the PM10 NAAQS or
PM10 standard refer to the 24-hour average standard of 150
[micro]g/m\3\, unless otherwise noted. Because they are identical, we
refer to the primary and secondary 24-hour standards using the single
term, NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 52 FR 24634 (July 1, 1987).
    \3\ 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 15, 1990, amendments to the CAA were enacted, and
pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Act, the Liberty Borough area
was designated nonattainment by operation of law.\4\ To support an
attainment demonstration, ACHD and the Commonwealth submitted to EPA
several SIP revisions that included permanent and enforceable pollution
controls in the Liberty Borough area, resulting in reduced ambient air
quality concentrations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On August 7, 1987 (56 FR 56694), EPA designated portions of
Allegheny County as a PM10 nonattainment area due to
measured violations of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS (52 FR
29383). The publication announcing the nonattainment designation
upon enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments was published on March 15,
1991 (56 FR 11101). On November 6, 1991, the area was subsequently
classified as moderate nonattainment under sections 107(d)(4)(B) and
188(a) of the CAA.
    \5\ 61 FR 29664 (June 12, 1996). 63 FR 47434 (September 8,
1998). 63 FR 32126 (June 12, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 8, 1998 (63 FR 47493), EPA finalized a determination
that the Liberty Borough area had attained the PM10 NAAQS
based on 1995-1997 air quality data. In that same action, EPA approved
the attainment demonstration and contingency measures for the area,
concluding that the Liberty Borough area attainment plan was sufficient
to help the Liberty Borough area attain and maintain the NAAQS.
    On October 28, 2002, the Commonwealth, on behalf of ACHD, submitted
to EPA a redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Liberty
Borough area. EPA redesignated the Liberty Borough area from
nonattainment to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS and approved
the maintenance plan for this first 10-year maintenance period on
September 11, 2003 (68 FR 53515).\6\ The first 10-year maintenance
period ended in 2013 and the second 10-year maintenance plan, which is
the subject of this proposed rulemaking, extends through 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Effective on October 14, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the redesignation request in 2002, ACHD has been operating an
ambient PM10 monitoring network with monitors at four sites
within the Liberty Borough area, in accordance with 40 Code of Federal
Register (CFR) part 58. The Liberty Borough area PM10
monitors are the Lincoln monitor (air quality system (AQS) site ID 42-
003-7003), the Liberty monitor (AQS site ID 42-003-0064),\7\ the
Glassport monitor (AQS site ID 42-003-3006), and the Clairton monitor
(AQS site ID 42-003-3007). The Lincoln, Liberty, and Glassport monitors
are Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) continuous monitors for
PM10. Liberty is also considered a multi-pollutant site with
monitors for other air pollutants at the same site, including a Federal
Reference Method (FRM) filter-based monitor for PM10. The
Clairton site has an FRM filter-based monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Liberty monitor site has two monitors, one is filter-
based and the other is continuous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Limited Maintenance Plan Option for PM10 Areas

A. Requirements for the Limited Maintenance Plan Option

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements for maintenance
plans. Under section 175A, a state or locality must submit a
maintenance plan to demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable
NAAQS for at least ten years after an area is redesignated to
attainment. Eight years into the first maintenance period, the
applicable state or local agency must submit a second maintenance plan
demonstrating that the area will continue to attain for the following
10-year period. On September 4, 1992, EPA issued guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan (Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director,
Air Quality Management Division, entitled ``Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' (Calcagni Memo)).\8\ The
Calcagni Memo states that a maintenance plan should include the
following provisions: (1) an attainment emissions inventory; (2) a
maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years; (3) a
commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network; (4)
verification of continued attainment; and (5) a contingency plan to
prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Memorandum from the EPA's Air Quality Management
Division Director to EPA Regional Air Directors entitled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' dated September 4, 1992 (Calcagni Memo) can be found
at www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-03/documents/calcagni_memo_-_procedures_for_processing_requests_to_redesignate_areas_to_attainment_090492.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 9, 2001, EPA issued guidance on streamlined maintenance
plan provisions for certain moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas (see Memorandum from Lydia Wegman, Director, Air Quality
Standards and Strategies Division, entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan
Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' (LMP Option
Memo).\9\ The LMP Option Memo contains a statistical demonstration air
agencies can use to show that areas are meeting certain air quality
criteria with a high degree of probability, and therefore will maintain
the standard ten years into the future. By providing this statistical
demonstration, EPA can consider the maintenance demonstration
requirement of the CAA to be satisfied for the moderate PM10
nonattainment area meeting these air quality criteria. If the tests
described in section IV of the LMP Option Memo are met, EPA will treat
that as a demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS.
Consequently, the state or local agency is not required to submit in
its SIP certain future year emission inventories for these areas nor
some of the standard transportation conformity analyses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' can be found at www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/aqmguide/collection/cp2/20010809_wegman_lmp_moderate_pm10_naa.pdf and in the docket for this
proposed rulemaking.

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

    To qualify for the LMP option, the applicable state or local agency
must demonstrate that the area meets the following criteria. First, the
area should have attained the PM10 NAAQS. Second, the most
recent five years of air quality data at all monitors in the area,
referred to as the 24-hour average design value, should be at or below
98 [micro]g/m\3\. Third, the applicable state or local agency should
expect only limited growth in on-road motor vehicle PM10
emissions and should have passed a motor vehicle regional emissions
analysis test. Lastly, the LMP Option Memo identifies core provisions
that must be included in all limited maintenance plans. These
provisions include an attainment year emissions inventory, assurance of
continued operation of an EPA-approved air quality monitoring network,
and contingency provisions.

B. Conformity Under the Limited Maintenance Option

    The transportation conformity rule and the general conformity rule
(set forth in 40 CFR parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment areas and
maintenance areas covered by an approved maintenance plan. Under either
conformity rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating that a Federal
action conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate that expected
emissions from the planned action are consistent with the on-road
mobile emissions budget for the area.
    While EPA's LMP option does not exempt an area from the need to
affirm conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity
without conforming to an emissions budget. Under the LMP option,
emissions budgets are treated as essentially not constraining for the
length of the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect
that the qualifying areas would experience so much on-road mobile
source emissions growth in that period that a violation of the
PM10 NAAQS would result. For transportation conformity
purposes, EPA would conclude that emissions in these areas need not be
capped for the maintenance period and therefore a regional emissions
analysis would not be required.
    While areas with maintenance plans approved under the LMP option
are not subject to the budget test (see 40 CFR 93.109(e)), those areas
remain subject to the other transportation conformity requirements of
40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan planning organization
(MPO) in the area or the state must document and ensure that:
    a. Transportation plans and projects provide for timely
implementation of SIP transportation control measures (TCMs) in
accordance with 40 CFR 93.113;
    b. Transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal
constraint element as set forth in 40 CFR 93.108;
    c. The MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet the
applicable requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
    d. Conformity of transportation plans is determined no less
frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan amendments and
transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the timing
requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104;
    e. The latest planning assumptions and emissions model are used as
set forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111;
    f. Projects do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon
monoxide or particulate matter violations, in accordance with
procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and
    g. Project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
    If EPA approves the second 10-year LMP, the Liberty Borough area
will continue to be exempt from performing a regional emissions
analysis, but must meet project-level conformity analyses as well as
the transportation conformity criteria described previously.

III. Review of the SIP Submittal

A. Qualifying for the Limited Maintenance Plan Option

    As discussed in Section II.A. of this preamble, the LMP Option Memo
outlines the requirements for an area to qualify for an LMP. First, the
area should be attaining the PM10 NAAQS. The PM10
NAAQS is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year
with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 [micro]g/m\3\ is equal
to or less than one (40 CFR 50.6). EPA has evaluated recent ambient air
quality data and the Liberty Borough area continues to attain the 24-
hour standard for PM10, not exceeding the standard on any
day at any of the four monitoring sites for over ten years (2011-
2021).\10\ Table 1, in this document, shows the highest and second
highest 24-hour PM10 concentrations measured at the five
Liberty Borough area monitors from 2011-2021, all of which are
consistently below the NAAQS of 150 [micro]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ There are four monitoring sites within the Liberty Borough
area, three sites with one monitor each and one site with two
monitors.

 Table 1--Highest/Second Highest Annual 24-Hour PM10 Concentrations ([micro]g/m\3\) at the Clairton, Glassport,
                                   Liberty, and Lincoln Monitors, 2011-2021\a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Glassport
              Year                Clairton (FRM)       (FEM)       Liberty (FEM)   Liberty (FRM)   Lincoln (FEM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................           37/37           83/74           70/70           93/72          115/94
2012............................           34/32           91/72           71/66           73/72           84/75
2013............................           25/25           60/57           49/48           59/47           76/65
2014............................           39/32           64/52           63/50           64/55           70/56
2015............................           41/34           91/56           78/61           64/59           85/79
2016............................           46/27           68/49           65/63           70/62           93/84
2017............................           29/28           68/68           87/58          106/61          108/93
2018............................           27/21           57/48           54/53           50/50           83/67
2019............................           26/22          105/86           74/68           72/71           75/57
2020............................           31/24           46/45           49/48           39/38           73/71
2021............................           24/24           58/54           57/54        Shutdown        Shutdown
                                                                                11/11/20        12/31/20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Data provided by EPA's Air Quality System (AQS).

    The second criteria for the PM10 LMP option is that the
24-hour average design value for the most recent five years of
monitoring data must be at or below 98 [micro]g/m\3\.\11\ ACHD
calculated the design values for the Liberty Borough area as the 3-year
averages of the yearly second-highest 24-hour PM10
concentration at each monitoring site, which was provided through 2020
in Table A-10 in its July 2021 LMP SIP submittal.12 13 EPA
looked at the most recent five years of 3-year averages from that table
(2016-2020) \14\ and determined that the Lincoln monitor showed the
uppermost second-highest design value with a value of 85 [micro]g/m\3\,
well below the LMP Option Memo threshold of 98 [micro]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ While the 2001 PM10 LMP Option Memo refers to a
June 1987 ``PM10 SIP Development Guideline'' document for
methods in calculating design values for PM10, neither
document provides specific information on how to calculate a design
value using five years of air quality data. In October 2022, after
ACHD submitted its PM10 LMP for the Liberty Borough area,
EPA gave further clarification of how to compute a design value
using five years of air quality data in a document titled ``Guidance
on the Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM2.5
Nonattainment Areas and PM2.5 Maintenance Areas.''
    \12\ ACHD took this method from EPA's NetAssess2020 tool for
monitored network assessments. https://sti-r-shiny.shinyapps.io/EPA_Network_Assessment/.
    \13\ See Table A-10 of ACHD's July 21, 2021 LMP SIP located in
the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
    \14\ The 3-year design values for 2016-2020 include the
following years: 2014-2016 (2016 3-year design value); 2015-2017
(2017 3-year design value); 2016-2018 (2018 3-year design value);
2017-2019 (2019 3-year design value); and 2018-2020 (2020 3-year
design value).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA used the table look-up procedure as one of the acceptable
approaches for determining appropriate 24-hour PM10 design
concentrations.\15\ The Agency calculated the 5-year average design
value for the Liberty Borough based on PM10 monitoring data
from 2017 through 2021, the most recently available certified data from
the Liberty Borough area monitoring sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The methods for calculating design values for
PM10 are presented in a document entitled the
``PM10 SIP Development Guideline,'' EPA-450/2-86-001,
June 1987.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the tabular approach for the 24-hour PM10 standard,
EPA first determined the total number of 24-hour PM10
concentrations at each monitoring site and the number of available 24-
hour concentrations to determine which of the highest concentrations is
chosen as the design concentration. Table 2, in this document, which is
the tabular estimation taken from EPA's PM10 SIP Development
Guideline, specifies which rank value corresponds to the probable
annual maximum value.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The look-up procedure is a tabular technique for
determining what point on the empirical frequency distribution
corresponds to a frequency of 1/365. By construction, the table
look-up procedure tends to provide a design concentration slightly
lower than would be derived using a continuous curve representing a
theoretical frequency distribution for PM10 values.
Additional explanation regarding the use of tabular estimation can
be found in EPA's PM10 SIP Development Guideline
document.

        Table 2--Tabular Estimation of PM10 Design Concentrations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Data point used for design
        Number of daily values                    concentration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=347.................................  Highest Value.
348-695...............................  Second Highest Value.
696-1042..............................  Third Highest Value.
1043-1390.............................  Fourth Highest Value.
1391-1738.............................  Fifth Highest Value.
1739-2086.............................  Sixth Highest Value.
2087-2434.............................  Seventh Highest Value.
>2345.................................  Eighth Highest Value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With multiple monitoring sites, the highest PM10
concentrations at each site would have to be considered and a design
concentration established for each location and the ``controlling''
design concentration for an area with multiple sites would be the
highest values. For routine model applications with five full years of
24-hour concentration estimates, the PM10 design
concentration of critical interest becomes the highest of the sixth-
highest concentrations for the entire receptor network.
    Tables 3, 4, and 5, in this document, provide the average design
values based on the tabular estimation method for the three Liberty
Borough area monitors that remained in operation through 2021. EPA
averaged the design values two ways for each of these monitors. First,
we conducted the 5-year design value by looking at the five years as a
whole set. For example, we counted the number of samples that occurred
between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2021. Then, as guided by in
Table 2, in this document, we found the appropriate data point from
amongst the 5-year data set.
    Alternatively, EPA also conducted the same process of reviewing the
number of samples and finding the appropriate data point, but with each
3-year design value period for the following five years: 2017, 2018,
2019, 2020, and 2021. We then calculated the average of the five 3-year
design values. The results can be found in Tables 3 through 5, in this
document.

          Table 3--PM10 Average Design Value for the Clairton Monitor (FRM), Tabular Estimation Method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design value years                           Number of  Data point used for          Limited maintenance plan
                                         daily samples   design concentration.    average design value ([micro]g/
                                                                                m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017-2021.............................             290  Highest Value...........                31
                                                                                -------------------------------
2015-2017.............................             167  Highest Value...........              46            36.6
2016-2018.............................             170  Highest Value...........              46
2017-2019.............................             173  Highest Value...........              29
2018-2020.............................             175  Highest Value...........              31
2019-2021.............................             177  Highest Value...........              31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Table 4--PM10 Average Design Value for the Glassport (FEM) Monitor, Tabular Estimation Method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design value years                           Number of  Data point used for          Limited maintenance plan
                                         daily samples   design concentration.    average design value ([micro]g/
                                                                                m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017-2021.............................            1797  Sixth Highest Value.....                59
                                                                                -------------------------------
2015-2017.............................            1084  Fourth Highest Value....              68            62.6
2016-2018.............................            1082  Fourth Highest Value....              59
2017-2019.............................            1080  Fourth Highest Value....              68
2018-2020.............................            1079  Fourth Highest Value....              59
2019-2021.............................            1080  Fourth Highest Value....              59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 5--PM10 Average Design Value for the Liberty (FEM) Monitor, Tabular Estimation Method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design value years                           Number of  Data point used for          Limited maintenance plan
                                         daily samples   design concentration.    average design value ([micro]g/
                                                                                m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017-2021.............................            1799  Sixth Highest Value.....                57
                                                                                -------------------------------
2015-2017.............................            1051  Fourth Highest Value....              63            59.6
2016-2018.............................            1055  Fourth Highest Value....              62
2017-2019.............................            1071  Fourth Highest Value....              60
2018-2020.............................            1083  Fourth Highest Value....              56
2019-2021.............................            1086  Fourth Highest Value....              57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Tables 3 through 5, in this document, all of the
average design values determined using the table look-up method through
2021 are below the LMP option design value criteria of 98 [micro]g/
m\3\. The highest average values obtained using EPA's method were at
the Glassport monitor (as seen in Table 4 in this document), but both
methods of calculating average design value provided results well below
98 [micro]g/m\3\. Therefore, EPA finds that the Liberty Borough area
meets the design value criteria outlined in the LMP Option Memo.
    Third, the area must meet the motor vehicle regional emissions
analysis test described in the LMP Option Memo. The Commonwealth and
ACHD submitted an analysis showing that growth of on-road mobile
PM10 emissions was minimal and would not threaten the
assumption of maintenance that underlies the LMP policy. Using EPA's
methodology, ACHD calculated total projected growth in on-road motor
vehicle PM10 emissions through 2031 \17\ for the Liberty
Borough area. This calculation is derived using Attachment B of the
EPA's LMP Option Memo, where the projected percentage increase in
vehicle miles traveled over the next ten years (VMTpi) is
multiplied by the on-road mobile portion of the attainment year
inventory (DVmv), including re-entrained road dust. This
test is met when (VMTpi x DVmv) plus the design
value for the most recent five years of quality assured data is below
the margin of safety (MOS) for the relevant PM10 standard in
[micro]g/m\3\ for a given area. This MOS value can be 98 [micro]g/m\3\,
as ACHD chose to use, or a site-specific value computed from data
collected at the site of interest using methods outlined in Attachment
A of the LMP Option Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Although this LMP applies to maintenance through 2023, ACHD
still used ten years as the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) projection
to be conservative. An interpolation of 2025 and 2035 VMT
projections was calculated to project for the year 2031. Projections
for Allegheny County were used to represent the area, since there
are no projections specific to the Liberty Borough area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ACHD used the motor vehicle regional analysis methodology with the
average design value of 85 [micro]g/m\3\ for the Liberty Borough area
using the highest 3-year design value for 2015, 2016, and 2017.
Additionally, for the motor vehicle regional analysis calculation, ACHD
used a VMTpi of 3.6 percent and a DVmv of 4.3
[micro]g/m\3\. ACHD's motor vehicle regional emissions test analysis
indicated a resulting value of 85.2 [micro]g/m\3\, which is below the
MOS of 98 [micro]g/m\3\.\18\ EPA reviewed the calculations in the
Liberty Borough area LMP SIP submission and the Agency proposes to find
that the area meets the motor vehicle regional emissions analysis test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Additional information on the data and calculations used
for ACHD's analysis can be found in ACHD's SIP submission which is
located in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described previously, the Liberty Borough area PM10
maintenance area meets the qualification criteria set forth in the LMP
Option Memo and accordingly qualifies for the LMP option. To ensure
these requirements continue to be met, ACHD commits to recalculating
the design value on an annual basis through the end of 2023. The motor
vehicle emissions test will also be recalculated annually using the
updated maximum design value over the past five years for the area. If
the test cannot be met (i.e., the equation shows a value above the
MOS), ACHD will submit a full maintenance plan for the area according
to CAA 175A requirements within one year after the determination of the
updated design values.

B. Attainment Inventory

    Pursuant to the LMP Option Memo, an LMP SIP submission should
include an emissions inventory, which can be used to demonstrate
attainment of the relevant NAAQS. The inventory should represent
emissions during the same 5-year period associated with air quality
data used to determine whether the area meets the applicability
requirements of the LMP option.
    The redesignation request and first 10-year maintenance plan for
the Liberty Borough area included a 1994 emissions inventory.\19\ The
inventory focused on stationary sources in Allegheny County and
surrounding counties, as well as wood burning, public roads, and
fugitive sources without permitted limits. Since the initial
maintenance plan and redesignation request, many of the sources have
lowered their permitted emissions rates of PM10 due to the
installation of controls, equipment upgrades, fuel switches, as well as
other factors, including shutting down. In the LMP SIP submittal, ACHD
noted several of the emission reductions from over the

years, including several modifications at the United States Steel
Corporation (USS) Mon Valley Works (MVW) Clairton Plant,\20\
representing an overall reduction of 268 tons per year (tpy) of
PM10 from the previous allowable inventory, as well as
shutdowns at several large sources outside of the area that provided
over 3,000 tpy of PM10 reductions from the previous
allowable inventory.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The inventory was updated in 1999.
    \20\ Mon Valley Works--Clairton Plant ``is an integrated
steelmaking operation that includes four separate facilities:
Clairton Plant, Edgar Thomson Plant, Irvin Plant and Fairless
Plant.'' Taken from www.ussteel.com/about-us/locations.
    \21\ See the PADEP/ACHD's July 21, 2021 SIP submission, located
in the docket for this proposed rulemaking, for additional changes
to the initial emissions allowable inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to ACHD, the total reductions in permitted allowable
rates since the initial redesignation request represent an almost
13,000 tpy overall reduction of PM10 allowable emissions.
This is approximately 55 percent lower than the allowable inventory
from the first 10-year maintenance period.
    To illustrate the current emissions in the Liberty Borough area,
ACHD's current LMP SIP submission included an inventory of actual
emissions using base year 2017. ACHD refers to this as the ``Liberty
Borough area maintenance emissions inventory.'' ACHD used the 2017
national emissions inventory (NEI), which was the most recent
comprehensive inventory that was available to ACHD at the time it was
preparing the LMP for the Liberty Borough area. The 2017 NEI is
representative of the typical emissions during which continued
attainment has occurred since the end of the Liberty Borough area's
first 10-year maintenance plan period in 2013.\22\ Table 6 includes the
following four main categories from the 2017 inventory: Stationary
point sources, area (nonpoint) sources, nonroad mobile sources, and on-
road mobile sources.\23\ Stationary point sources contribute the
largest amount of primary PM10 emissions (82 percent) and
its precursors (87 percent),\24\ within the Liberty Borough area. Among
all the stationary sources in the Liberty Borough area, the USS MVW
Clairton Plant contributes the most PM10 primary and
precursor emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Additional information on ACHD's actual inventory can be
found in the SIP submission located in the docket for this proposed
action.
    \23\ A more detailed version of the inventory can be found in
Appendix A of PADEP/ACHD's July 2021 SIP submission.
    \24\ Precursors for PM10 include sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and ammonia (NH3).

                             Table 6--Liberty Borough Area 2017 Emissions Inventory
                                                    [tpy] \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Liberty borough area            PM10\c\           SO2             NOX            VOCs             NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point Sources \b\....          877.93        1,129.86        2,626.26          184.45          118.87
Area (Nonpoint) Sources \d\.....          175.07            4.01           95.80          275.23            9.85
Nonroad Mobile Sources \d\......            4.33            0.10           37.83           33.19            0.09
Onroad Mobile Sources \d\.......           10.48            0.83           94.11           57.41            3.60
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................        1,067.81        1,134.80        2,854.00          550.28          132.41
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Taken from ACHD's PM10 LMP for the Liberty Borough area.
\b\ Inventoried stationary sources within the Liberty Borough area include USS MVW Clairton Plant, Tech Met,
  Inc., Koppers Inc., and AKJ Steel Industries.
\c\ Total primary PM10.
\d\ Since NEI emissions are located to the county-level, ACHD used the U.S. Census's estimates for the 2017
  population percentage of the Liberty Borough area to scale down emissions from the total Allegheny County
  population.

1. Expected Emissions
    In the July 21, 2021, second maintenance plan SIP submission, ACHD
noted that there is little growth in emissions expected for the Liberty
Borough area through the end of the maintenance period in 2023. ACHD
attributes the lack of potential for emissions growth through 2023 to
several factors, including a 2019 settlement agreement and order with
USS MVW Clairton Plant that requires the facility to conduct upgrades
and work practice enhancements through 2023.\25\ ACHD provides
additional information in their LMP submission regarding other programs
and actions that will help to maintain or lower PM10
emissions in the Liberty Borough area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Allegheny County Health Department Air Quality Program.
Settlement Agreement and Order #19060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. PM10 SIP Controls
    In accordance with the CAA, areas seeking to use the LMP approach
for maintenance must have an attainment plan that has been approved by
EPA. That LMP should clearly indicate that all controls that were
relied on to demonstrate attainment will remain in place. The July 21,
2021, LMP SIP submission identifies the control strategies approved
into the Liberty Borough area's attainment plan to bring the area into
compliance. These controls were approved into the Pennsylvania SIP as
permanent and enforceable measures and assisted the Liberty Borough
area in attaining the PM10 NAAQS.\26\ These controls are to
remain in place for the duration of the second maintenance period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 61 FR 29664 (June 12, 1996) and 63 FR 32126 (June 12,
1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The July 21, 2021 SIP submission meets EPA guidance for purposes of
an attainment emissions inventory, and the emissions inventory data
supports ACHD's conclusions that the existing control measures will
continue to protect and maintain the PM10 NAAQS.

C. Maintenance Demonstration

    ACHD provided a maintenance demonstration for the Liberty Borough
area in the first 10-year maintenance plan, which EPA approved on
September 11, 2003 (68 FR 53515). According to EPA's 2001
PM10 LMP Option Memo, if an area qualifies for the LMP
option, EPA will treat that as a demonstration that the area will
maintain the NAAQS and that, consequently, there is no need to model
projected emissions over the maintenance period. Therefore, the Liberty
Borough area is exempt from projecting emissions levels through the end
date of the second 10-year maintenance plan.

D. Air Quality Monitoring Network

    Once an area is redesignated, the applicable state or local agency
must continue to operate an appropriate air monitoring network in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify the attainment

status of the area. ACHD has operated PM10 monitors
according to 40 CFR part 58 requirements at four sites within the
Liberty Borough area since submittal of the redesignation request in
2002. A description, as well as a map, of the four Liberty Borough area
PM10 monitors can be found in ACHD's LMP plan.\27\ On
December 21, 2022, ACHD submitted its 2021 Annual Monitoring Network
Plan, which EPA approved on February 24, 2023.\28\ ACHD indicated in
the Liberty Borough area second 10-year maintenance plan that it will
continue to operate the air monitoring network in accordance with 40
CFR part 58 to verify the attainment status of the area, with no
changes to the existing network unless preapproved by EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Located in the docket for this proposed rulemaking. Docket
No. EPA-R03-OAR-2023-0219, www.regulations.gov.
    \28\ EPA's approval letters for ACHD's past several Annual
Monitoring Network Plans are included in the docket for this
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Verification of Continued Attainment

    The level of the PM10 NAAQS is 150 [micro]g/m\3\, 24-
hour average concentration. The NAAQS is attained when the expected
number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration
above 150 [micro]g/m\3\ is equal to or less than one.\29\ As stated in
the previous section of this preamble, ACHD plans to continue to
operate a regulatory monitoring network and will continue to track the
attainment status of the Liberty Borough area for the PM10
NAAQS by reviewing monitored air quality concentrations during the
maintenance period through 2023. ACHD will also continue to operate the
air monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify the
attainment status of the area, with no changes to the existing network
unless pre-approved by EPA. Included in its second 10-year maintenance
plan SIP submission, ACHD evaluated the complete, quality-assured,
maximum 24-hour PM10 concentrations at each Liberty Borough
area monitor from 2001-2020 to verify continued attainment of the
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See 40 CFR 50.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Contingency Provisions

    Section 175A of the CAA states that a maintenance plan must include
contingency provisions, as necessary, to ensure prompt correction of
any violation of the NAAQS which may occur after redesignation of the
area to attainment. As explained in the LMP Option Memo and the
Calcagni Memo, these contingency provisions are an enforceable part of
a federally approved SIP. The maintenance plan should clearly identify
the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and implementation of a
contingency provision, the contingency provision(s) that would be
adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by
which the state and/or locality would adopt and implement the
provision(s). The LMP Option Memo and the Calcagni Memo state that EPA
will determine the adequacy of a contingency plan on a case-by-case
basis. At a minimum, it must require that the applicable state or local
agency implement all measures contained in the CAA part D nonattainment
plan for the area prior to redesignation.
    In the Liberty Borough area PM10 LMP, ACHD indicated
that the contingency provisions for the second 10-year maintenance plan
are identical the contingency measures included in the area's
attainment plan that was approved on September 8, 1998 (63 FR 47434).
The contingency provisions include a requirement that the USS MVW
Clairton Plant improve the capture of pushing emissions from its coke
batteries. Within 60 days after determination of a violation of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS at any Liberty Borough area monitor, the
contingency measures will be implemented. No contingency provisions or
measures have been triggered at any time since the attainment plan SIP
was approved in 1998.
    EPA proposes to determine that the contingency provisions submitted
in the Liberty Borough area PM10 LMP are adequate to meet
CAA section 175A requirements and the contingency provisions as
outlined in the LMP Option Memo.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the second 10-year PM10
limited maintenance plan for the Liberty Borough area. EPA has reviewed
the air quality data for this area and determined that it continues to
show attainment of the PM10 NAAQS and meets all the LMP
requirements as described in this action. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this document. These comments will
be considered before taking final action. If finalized, EPA's approval
of this LMP will satisfy the section 175A CAA requirements for
PM10 for the second 10-year maintenance period for the
Liberty Borough area.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to
identify and address ``disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects'' of their actions on minority populations and
low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted
by law. EPA defines environmental justice (E.J.) as ``the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race,
color,

national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    The ACHD did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did
not perform an E.J. analysis and did not consider E.J. in this proposed
rulemaking. Due to the nature of the proposed action being taken here,
this proposed rulemaking is expected to have a neutral to positive
impact on the air quality of the affected area.
    In addition, this proposed rulemaking, regarding the second 10-year
maintenance plan for the Liberty Borough PM10 area, does not
have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in
Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2023-14645 Filed 7-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45653-45654]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18831]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0323: FRL-9931-61-Region 10]

Adequacy Determination for the Grants Pass, Oregon
PM10 State Implementation Plan for Transportation Conformity
Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy determination.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is notifying the
public of its finding that the Grants Pass, Oregon second 10-year
limited maintenance plan (LMP) for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of a nominal 10 microns or less (PM10)
is adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The LMP was
submitted to the EPA by the State of Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ or the State) on April 22, 2015. As a result of our
adequacy finding, regional emissions analyses will no longer be
required as part of the transportation conformity demonstrations for
PM10 for the Grants Pass area.

DATES: This finding is effective August 17, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The finding will be available at the
EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. You may also contact Dr. Karl Pepple, U.S. EPA,
Region 10 (OAWT-107), 1200 Sixth Ave., Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101;
(206) 553-1778; or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This action provides notice of the EPA's
adequacy finding regarding the second 10-year PM10 limited
maintenance plan (LMP) for the Grants Pass area for purposes of
transportation conformity. The EPA's finding was made pursuant to the
adequacy review process for implementation plan submissions delineated
at 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1) under which the EPA reviews the adequacy of a
state implementation plan (SIP) submission prior to the EPA's final
action on the implementation plan.
    The State submitted the LMP to the EPA on April 22, 2015. Pursuant
to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1), the EPA notified the public of its receipt of
this plan and its review for an adequacy determination on the EPA's Web
site and requested public comment by no later than June 3, 2015. The
EPA received no comments on the plan during the comment period. As part
of our analysis, we also

reviewed the State's compilation of public comments and response to
comments that were submitted during the State's public process for the
LMP. There were no adverse comments directed at the on-road portion of
the LMP.
    Based on our review, the EPA believes it is appropriate to find
this LMP adequate for use in transportation conformity prior to final
action on the LMP. The EPA has moved forward with an approval notice
for the Grants Pass PM10 LMP. Until that action is final and
effective, this adequacy finding allows the State to apply the LMP for
transportation conformity purposes.
    The EPA notified ODEQ in a letter dated June 24, 2015 (adequacy
letter), subsequent to the close of the EPA comment period, that the
EPA had found the LMP to be adequate for use in transportation
conformity. A copy of the adequacy letter and its enclosure are
available in the docket for this action and at the EPA's conformity Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 93.109(e), limited maintenance plans are not
required to contain on-road motor vehicle emissions budgets.
Accordingly, as a result of this adequacy finding, regional emissions
analyses will no longer be required as a part of the transportation
conformity demonstrations for PM10 for the Grants Pass area.
However, other conformity requirements still remain such as
consultation (40 CFR 93.112), transportation control measures (40 CFR
93.113), and project level analysis (40 CFR 93.116).
    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act. Transportation conformity to a SIP means that on-road
transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards. The minimum criteria by which we
determine whether a SIP is adequate for conformity purposes are
specified at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The EPA's analysis of how the LMP
satisfies these criteria is found in the adequacy letter and its
enclosure.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-767Iq.

    Dated: July 15, 2015.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015-18831 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P