Adequacy Status of the Kewaunee County, Wisconsin, Submitted 8-Hour Ozone Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Transportation Conformity Purposes, 68160-68161 [E7-23493]

Download as PDF 68160 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 4, 2007 / Notices ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or tollfree at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. You may also register online at http:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission’s Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any protests or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified deadline date for the particular application. All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title ‘‘PROTEST’’ or ‘‘MOTION TO INTERVENE;’’ (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Issue Acceptance letter ...... Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments. Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary). Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis. Notice of the availability of the draft EA. VerDate Aug<31>2005 November 2007. April 2008. June 2008. October 2008. June 2009. 17:38 Dec 03, 2007 Jkt 214001 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7–23454 Filed 12–3–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 November 27, 2007. Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: Docket Numbers: RP07–319–001. Applicants: Viking Gas Transmission Company. Description: Viking Gas Transmission Company submits Substitute Twelfth Revised Sheet 5C to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1. Filed Date: 11/20/2007. Accession Number: 20071121–0122. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 3, 2007. Docket Numbers: RP96–320–074. Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP. Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits negotiated rate contracts executed and its various customers in relation to the East Texas to Mississippi Expansion Project. Filed Date: 11/20/2007. Accession Number: 20071121–0080. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 3, 2007. Docket Numbers: RP99–176–144. Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Natural Gas Co. of America. Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America submits Amendment 1 to the Transportation Rate Schedule FTS Agreement with Eagle Energy Partners 1, LP. Filed Date: 11/20/2007. Accession Number: 20071120–0131. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 3, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http:// www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission’s eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Acting Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7–23446 Filed 12–3–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–R05–OAR–2007–0957; FRL–8501–2] Adequacy Status of the Kewaunee County, Wisconsin, Submitted 8-Hour Ozone Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Transportation Conformity Purposes Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of adequacy. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 8-hour ozone in Kewaunee County, Wisconsin are adequate for conformity purposes. As a result of our finding, Kewaunee County E:\FR\FM\04DEN1.SGM 04DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 4, 2007 / Notices 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, preamble starting at 69 FR 40038, and we used the information in these resources while making our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA’s completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved. The finding and the response to comments are available at EPA’s conformity Web site: http:// www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/adequacy.htm. Background Today’s action is simply an announcement of a finding that we have already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on November 6, 2007, stating that the 2012 and 2018 MVEBs in Kewaunee County are adequate. Wisconsin submitted the budgets as part of the 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan for this area. This submittal was announced on EPA’s conformity website, and received no comments: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm, (once there, click on ‘‘What SIP submissions are currently under EPA adequacy review?’’). The 2012 and 2018 MVEBs, in tons per day (tpd), for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for Kewaunee County are as follows: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES must use the MVEBs from the submitted 8-hour ozone redesignation and maintenance plan for future conformity determinations. DATES: This finding is effective December 19, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8777, Maietta.anthony@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. Dated: November 20, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E7–23493 Filed 12–3–07; 8:45 am] Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [Regional Docket Nos. V–2006–3, FRL– 8501–5] Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Louisiana Pacific Corporation, Tomahawk, WI Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final order on petition to object to Clean Air Act operating permit. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document announces that the EPA Administrator has 2012 MVEB 2018 MVEB responded to a petition asking EPA to (tpd) (tpd) object to a Clean Air Act (Act) operating VOC .................. 0.43 0.32 permit issued by the Wisconsin NOX ................... 0.80 0.47 Department of Natural Resources. Specifically, the Administrator granted Transportation conformity is required in part and denied in part the petition submitted by David Bender of Garvey by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. McNeil & McGillivray, S.C., on behalf of EPA’s conformity rule requires that the Sierra Club, to object to the transportation plans, programs, and operating permit for Louisiana Pacific projects conform to state air quality Corporation’s Tomahawk, Wisconsin, implementation plans and establishes facility. the criteria and procedures for Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the determining whether or not they do. Act, a petitioner may seek in the United Conformity to a State Implementation States Court of Appeals for the Plan (SIP) means that transportation appropriate circuit judicial review of activities will not produce new air those portions of the petition which quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of EPA denied. Any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the the national ambient air quality date this notice appears in the Federal standards. Register, pursuant to section 307 of the The criteria by which we determine Act. whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity ADDRESSES: You may review a copy of purposes are outlined in 40 CFR the final order, the petition, and other VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Dec 03, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 68161 supporting information at the EPA, Region 5 Office, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. If you wish to examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before visiting day. Additionally, the final order for the Louisiana Pacific petition is available electronically at: http:// yosemite.epa.gov/r5/ardcorre.nsf/ permits. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, telephone (312) 886– 4447. The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to review, and object to as appropriate, operating permits proposed by state permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator within 60 days after the expiration of the EPA review period to object to state operating permits if EPA has not done so. A petition must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise issues during the comment period, or the grounds for the issues arose after this period. On May 15, 2006, the EPA received a petition from David Bender of Garvey McNeil & McGillivray, S.C., on behalf of the Sierra Club, that EPA object to the Title V operating permit for the Louisiana Pacific Tomahawk facility. The petition raised issues regarding: (1) The sufficiency of monitoring for visible and particulate matter emissions; (2) the alleged failure to include federally enforceable applicable State Implementation Plan limits; (3) language that allegedly violates the credible evidence rule; and (4) conditions that allegedly are not practically enforceable. On November 5, 2007, the Administrator issued an order granting in part and denying in part the petition. The order explains the reasons behind EPA’s conclusion. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: November 20, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E7–23479 Filed 12–3–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\04DEN1.SGM 04DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68160-68161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23493]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R05-OAR-2007-0957; FRL-8501-2]


Adequacy Status of the Kewaunee County, Wisconsin, Submitted 8-
Hour Ozone Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Transportation 
Conformity Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found 
that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 8-hour ozone in 
Kewaunee County, Wisconsin are adequate for conformity purposes. As a 
result of our finding, Kewaunee County

[[Page 68161]]

must use the MVEBs from the submitted 8-hour ozone redesignation and 
maintenance plan for future conformity determinations.

DATES: This finding is effective December 19, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, 
Criteria Pollutant Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 
353-8777, Maietta.anthony@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we'', 
``us'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Background

    Today's action is simply an announcement of a finding that we have 
already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Wisconsin Department of 
Natural Resources on November 6, 2007, stating that the 2012 and 2018 
MVEBs in Kewaunee County are adequate. Wisconsin submitted the budgets 
as part of the 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan 
for this area. This submittal was announced on EPA's conformity 
website, and received no comments: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm, (once there, click on ``What SIP 
submissions are currently under EPA adequacy review?'').
    The 2012 and 2018 MVEBs, in tons per day (tpd), for volatile 
organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for 
Kewaunee County are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 2012 MVEB    2018 MVEB
                                                   (tpd)        (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................................         0.43         0.32
NOX...........................................         0.80         0.47
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the 
Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation 
plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality 
implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for 
determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) means that transportation activities will not 
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or 
delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle 
emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, preamble 
starting at 69 FR 40038, and we used the information in these resources 
while making our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy 
review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it also should 
not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we 
find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.
    The finding and the response to comments are available at EPA's 
conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/
adequacy.htm.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: November 20, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E7-23493 Filed 12-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P