Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

extending from the 6.4-mile radius of Sand

Point Airport, AK, to 17 miles northwest of

Sand Point Airport, AK, and within 5 miles

either side of the 324° bearing from the

Borland NDB/DME, AK, extending from the

6.4-mile of the Sand Point Airport, AK to 17

miles northwest of the Sand Point Airport,

AK. Mile radius, and within a 6.6-mile radius

of St. George Airport, AK, and within an 8mile radius of St. Paul Island Airport, AK,

and 8 miles west and 6 miles east of the 360°

bearing from St. Paul Island Airport, AK, to

14 miles north of St. Paul Island Airport, AK,

and within 6 miles west and 8 miles east of

the 172° bearing from St. Paul Island Airport,

AK to 15 miles south of Paul Island Airport,

AK, and within a 6.4-mile radius of Unalaska

Airport, AK, and within 2.9 miles each side

of the 360° bearing from the Dutch Harbor

NDB, AK, extending from the 6.4-mile radius

of Unalaska Airport, AK, to 9.5 miles north

of Unalaska Airport, AK; and that airspace

extending upward from 1,200 feet above the

surface within a 26.2-mile radius of

Eareckson Air Station, AK, within an 11-mile

radius of Adak Airport, AK, and within 16

miles of Adak Airport, AK, extending

clockwise from the 033° bearing to the 081°

bearing from the Mount Moffett NDB, AK,

and within a 10-mile radius of Atka Airport,

AK, and within a 10.6-mile radius from Cold

Bay Airport, AK, and within 9 miles east and

4.3 miles west of the 321° bearing from Cold

Bay Airport, AK, extending from the 10.6mile radius to 20 miles northwest of Cold

Bay Airport, AK, and 4 miles each side of the

070° bearing from Cold Bay Airport, AK,

extending from the 10.6-mile radius to 13.6

miles northeast of Cold Bay Airport, AK, and

west of 160°W. longitude within an 81.2-mile

radius of Perryville Airport, AK, and within

a 10-mile radius of St. George Airport, AK,

and within a 73-mile radius of St. Paul Island

Airport, AK, and within a 20-mile radius of

Unalaska Airport, AK, extending clockwise

from the 305° bearing from the Dutch Harbor

NDB, AK, to the 075° bearing from the Dutch

Harbor NDB, AK, and west of 160°W.

longitude within a 25-mile radius of the

Borland NDB/DME, AK, and west of 160°W

longitude within a 72.8-mile radius of

Chignik Airport, AK.

*

*

*

*

*

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 28,

2007.

Edith V. Parish,

Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.

[FR Doc. E7–13222 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket FAA No. FAA–2006–24926;

Airspace Docket No. 06–ASW–1]

Establishment, Modification and

Revocation of VOR Federal Airways;

East Central United States

*

*

*

*

V–65 [Corrected]

From DRYER, OH; Sandusky, OH; INT

Sandusky 288° and Carleton, MI 157° radials;

to Carleton.

*

*

*

*

*

Administration (FAA), DOT.

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This action corrects a final

rule published in the Federal Register

June 15, 2007 (72 FR 33151), Airspace

Docket No. 06–ASW–1, FAA Docket No.

FAA–2006–24926. In that rule, an error

was made in the legal description for

VOR Federal Airway V–65. Specifically,

the description omitted the words

‘‘Sandusky, OH’’. This action corrects

that error.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, August 30,

2007. The Director of the Federal

Register approves this incorporation by

reference action under 1 CFR part 51,

subject to the annual revision of FAA

Order 7400.9 and publication of

conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steve Rohring, Airspace and Rules

Group, Office of System Operations

Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;

telephone: (202) 267–8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

On June 15, 2007, a final rule for

Airspace Docket No. 06–ASW–1, FAA

Docket No. FAA–2006–24926 was

published in the Federal Register (72

FR 33151), establishing VOR Federal

Airway V–65 over the East Central

United States. The legal description for

V–65 was incorrect in that a reference

to the Sandusky, OH, VORTAC was

omitted. The correct legal description

should contain the words ‘‘Sandusky,

OH’’. This action corrects that error.

Correction to Final Rule

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority

delegated to me, the legal description as

published in the Federal Register on

June 15, 2007 (72 FR 33151), Airspace

Docket No. 06–ASW–1, FAA Docket No.

FAA–2006–24926, and incorporated by

reference in 14 CFR 71.1, is corrected as

follows:

[Amended]

description for V–65, to read as follows:

Jkt 211001

VOR Federal Airways.

*

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

■ On page 33152, correct the legal

15:36 Jul 09, 2007

Paragraph 6010

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 2, 2007.

Edith V. Parish,

Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.

[FR Doc. E7–13209 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]

§ 71.1

VerDate Aug<31>2005

37431

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. RM06–7–001; Order No. 686–

A]

18 CFR Part 157

Revisions to the Blanket Certificate

Regulations and Clarification

Regarding Rates

Issued June 22, 2007.

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule; order on rehearing

and clarification.

SUMMARY: On October 19, 2006, the

Commission issued a Final Rule

amending its regulations to expand the

scope and scale of activities that may be

undertaken pursuant to blanket

certificate authority and clarifying that

existing Commission policies permit

natural gas companies to charge

different rates to different classes of

customers. The revised regulations

allow interstate natural gas pipelines to

employ the streamlined blanket

certificate procedures for larger projects

and for a wider variety of types of

projects, thereby increasing efficiencies,

and decreasing time and costs,

associated with the construction and

maintenance of the nation’s natural gas

infrastructure. The Commission grants

in part, and denies in part, requests for

rehearing and clarification of the Final

Rule.

DATES: The amendments in this final

rule are effective August 9, 2007, except

that the amendment to § 157.206

(b)(5)(i) is effective November 7, 2007.

Requests for clarification are granted

and denied, and requests for rehearing

are denied, effective August 9, 2007.

The request for rehearing with respect to

the measurement of compressor noise is

granted, effective November 7, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gordon Wagner, Office of the General

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1

37432

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20426,

gordon.wagner@ferc.gov, (202) 502–

8947. Michael McGehee, Office of

Energy Projects, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,

michael.mcgehee@ferc.gov, (202) 502–

8962.

Lonnie Lister, Office of Energy

Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20426,

lonnie.lister@ferc.gov, 202–502–8587.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Before

Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher,

Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Mark

Spitzer, Phillip D. Moeller, and John

Wellinghoff.

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

I. Introduction

1. On October 19, 2006, the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission

(Commission) issued a Final Rule in

Order No. 6861 amending Part 157,

Subpart F, of its regulations to expand

the scope and scale of activities that

may be undertaken pursuant to blanket

certificate authority by (1) broadening

the types of natural gas projects

permitted under blanket certificate

authority to include certain mainline,

storage, and liquefied natural gas (LNG)

and synthetic gas pipeline facilities, and

(2) increasing the blanket certificate

project cost limits from $8,200,000 to

$9,600,000 for automatic authorization

projects and from $22,700,000 to

$27,400,000 for prior notice projects.2 In

addition, Order No. 686 clarified that a

company is not necessarily engaged in

an unduly discriminatory practice if it

charges different customers different

rates for the same service when

customers commit to service on

different dates. The revised blanket

certificate regulations became effective

on January 2, 2007, and are intended to

allow interstate natural gas pipelines to

employ the streamlined blanket

certificate procedures for larger projects

and for a wider variety of types of

projects, thereby increasing efficiencies,

and decreasing time and costs

1 Order No. 686, 71 FR 63680 (October 31, 2006),

FERC Stats & Regs ¶ 31,231 (2006); Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 71 FR 36276 (June

26, 2006), FERC Stats. Regs.

¶ 32,606 (2006). This rulemaking proceeding was

initiated in response to a petition submitted under

18 CFR 385.207(a) of the Commission’s regulations

by the Interstate Natural Gas Association of

America (INGAA) jointly with the Natural Gas

Supply Association.

2 These cost limits now stand at $9,900,000 for an

automatic authorization project and $28,200,000 for

a prior notice project. See Natural Gas Pipelines;

Project Cost and Annual Limits, 72 FR 5614 (Feb.

7, 2007).

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:13 Jul 09, 2007

Jkt 211001

associated with the construction and

maintenance of the nation’s natural gas

infrastructure.

2. In this order, for the reasons

discussed below, the Commission grants

and denies requests for clarification and

denies requests for rehearing of the

Final Rule.

II. Requests for Rehearing and

Clarification

3. NiSource Gas Transmission and

Storage Companies (NiSource),3 the

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation

(National Fuel), and INGAA submitted

timely requests for rehearing and/or

clarification. For the reasons discussed

below, requests for clarification are

granted and denied, as discussed below.

Requests for rehearing are denied, with

the exception of INGAA’s rehearing

request with respect to the measurement

of compressor noise, which is granted.

A. NiSource

4. Section 157.208(f)(2) of the blanket

certificate regulations permits natural

gas companies to alter the maximum

allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of

supply or delivery laterals, provided

companies comply with the prior notice

provisions of § 157.205 of those

regulations. NiSource proposes that

companies be permitted to rely on

blanket certificate authority to change

the MAOP of facilities that are not

supply or delivery laterals.

5. The Final Rule permits companies

to construct compression and loop lines

to expand mainline capacity under

blanket authority. Consistent with this

approach, the Commission clarifies that,

provided companies meet all applicable

blanket certificate regulatory

requirements, they can rely on blanket

certificate authority to change the

MAOP of facilities that are not supply

or delivery laterals, such as mainlines.

B. National Fuel

6. The Final Rule extends blanket

certificate authority to include certain

underground storage field projects.

National Fuel supports this inclusion,

but seeks assurance that storage

remediation and maintenance activities

that qualify as auxiliary installations or

replacements under § 2.55 of the

Commission’s regulations can still be

undertaken pursuant to § 2.55, and need

not now proceed under the automatic or

prior notice provisions of the blanket

certificate program. National Fuel also

seeks clarification that plugging and

3 NiSource consists of Columbia Gas

Transmission Corporation, Columbia Gulf

Transmission Company, Crossroads Pipeline

Company, Granite State Gas Transmission, Inc., and

Central Kentucky Transmission Company.

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

abandoning storage wells constitutes

maintenance, and as such will be

eligible to be undertaken pursuant to the

automatic authorization provisions of

§ 157.213(a), and will not be viewed as

altering the function of a well, which

would require adherence to the prior

notice requirements of § 157.205(b).

7. The Final Rule’s enlargement of the

scope of blanket certificate authority

does not constrict the scope of activities

that may be performed under § 2.55 of

the Commission’s regulations. Thus,

activities involving storage, mainline,

and LNG and synthetic gas pipeline

facilities that could have been

performed under § 2.55 prior to the

expansion of the blanket certificate

program may continue to be performed

under § 2.55. Further, as before, a

company need not obtain a blanket

certificate as a prerequisite to act under

§ 2.55.

8. The Commission clarifies that the

reference in new § 157.213(a) to altering

‘‘the function of any well that is drilled

into or is active in the management of

the storage facility’’ is not intended to

include temporarily plugging a storage

field well as part of standard

maintenance operations. In contrast,

permanently plugging a well would not

qualify as standard maintenance, but

would instead constitute an

abandonment, as it would permanently

alter the function of the well, and could

impact the performance of the storage

field. Accordingly, such an action

would need to comply with the blanket

certificate program’s § 157.216

regulatory requirements regarding an

abandonment.

9. In addition, the Commission will

revise §§ 157.213(b) and (c) to permit

companies to employ blanket certificate

authority to make modifications to

storage facilities to enhance injection

and withdrawal capacity. This is

consistent with the Commission’s

previously expressed intent to permit a

company to rely on expanded blanket

certificate authority ‘‘to re-engineer an

existing storage facility to decrease

cushion gas, increase working gas,

improve injection and withdrawal

capabilities, and add more cycles per

season,’’ provided the company can

‘‘demonstrate, by theoretical or

empirical evidence, that a proposed

project will improve storage operations

without altering an underground storage

facility’s total inventory, reservoir

pressure, or reservoir or buffer

boundaries, and will comply with

environmental and safety provisions.’’ 4

4 71 FR 36276, 36281 (June 26, 2006), FERC Stats.

& Regs. ¶ 32,606 (2006).

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

C. INGAA

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

1. Compressor Station Noise

10. The blanket certificate program

relies on the presumption that any

project permitted under blanket

certificate authority will not have a

significant adverse environmental

impact. The Commission ensures that

this is the case by restricting blanket

certificate authority to certain types of

facilities and to individual projects that

can comply with a cost cap and the

environmental requirements specified

in § 157.206(b). Prior to the Final Rule’s

increase in the per project cost cap and

the expansion of blanket certificate

authority to cover compressor facilities

that alter mainline capacity, blanket

certificate authority was restricted to a

limited set of compression facilities,

e.g., compressors on lateral pipelines,

compressors installed temporarily,

replacement compressors that could not

qualify under § 2.55(b), and compressors

needed to restore service lost due to

sudden unforeseen damage to a

mainline.

11. A compressor project under the

blanket certificate program is not subject

to the same scrutiny and procedural

safeguards that apply to a compressor

project subject to case-specific NGA

section 7 certificate authority. A casespecific application is subject to a more

extensive notification process than a

proposed blanket certificate project;

indeed, for a project that qualifies for

automatic authorization under the

blanket certificate regulations, the

Commission itself does not receive

notice in advance of the project’s

construction. Thus, in contrast to a

request for case-specific certificate

authority, for a compressor project

subject to blanket certificate authority,

the Commission and public do not have

the opportunity to assess aspects of a

proposal such as what constitutes a

noise sensitive area (NSA),5 the

prospective uses of property proximate

to a compressor facility, habitat impacts

on non-residential areas, whether a

particular area has a heightened noise

sensitivity that would merit a limit of

less than 55 dBA, or the cumulative

impacts resulting from modifying or

expanding existing compressor

facilities.

12. As a result, whereas an individual

assessment can be undertaken for each

proposed case-specific compressor

project in order to establish a noise level

appropriate to the particular site, this is

5 In the case of a blanket certificate compressor

project, the blanket certificate holder, rather than

the Commission, determines what constitutes a

potentially affected NSA.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:13 Jul 09, 2007

Jkt 211001

not the case for blanket certificate

compressor projects. The more cursory

standard of review necessary to expedite

projects under the blanket certificate

program, coupled with the expansion of

blanket certificate authority to cover

larger and more varied types of

compressor facilities, prompted the

Commission to impose a stricter

standard on the noise produced by

blanket certificate compressor facilities.

As described in the NOPR and

implemented in the Final Rule, the

Commission stated that, going forward,

all compressor facilities constructed

pursuant to blanket certificate authority

must meet a standard day-night level

(Ldn) limit of 55 dBA at the boundary of

the compressor site. Previously, the

Commission had required that

compressor facilities installed under

blanket certificate authority meet a

noise level of 55 dBA at any pre-existing

NSA.6

13. INGAA requests the Commission

revert to this prior noise criterion.

INGAA argues that (1) noise attenuation

equipment may have an adverse impact

on air quality; (2) compressor

equipment has been installed based on

a 55 dBA noise limit at nearby NSAs,

and not on the basis of the noise at the

site boundary; (3) companies will be

compelled to acquire larger areas of land

to push compressor station boundaries

out from the noise source to meet the 55

dBA standard, which could damage

relationships with nearby landowners

and inhibit companies from upgrading

facilities at existing stations; and (4) it

will be more costly to comply with the

new noise standard.

14. The Commission acknowledges

that noise attenuation equipment may

adversely impact air quality, but notes

that depending upon the chosen control

technology, such equipment may also

improve air emissions. Shifting the

location for measuring noise from new

facilities should not impact existing

facilities, given that ‘‘this new noise

measurement criterion only applies to

facilities placed in service after the

effective date of th[e] rule.’’ 7

15. The Commission anticipated that

if a company expected a new project

might compel it to acquire land or make

costly investments to meet the new

blanket certificate program’s noise

6 This compressor noise constraint has always

been a part of the environmental compliance

conditions of the blanket certificate program.

Interstate Pipeline Certificates for Routine

Transactions, Order No. 234, 47 FR 24254 (June 4,

1982), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,368 (1982); Order

No. 234–A, 47 FR 38871 (Sept. 3, 1982), FERC Stats.

& Regs. ¶ 30,389 (1982).

7 71 FR 63680 (Oct. 31, 2006), FERC Stats. & Regs.

¶ 31,231, P 57 (2006) (footnote omitted).

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

37433

criterion, the company could instead

seek case-specific NGA section 7

certificate authorization as an

economically preferable alternative.

Noise limits for case-specific

compressor projects are established after

a staff analysis of the properties of each

particular project site, and for such

projects, the Commission typically has

found 55 dBA at existing NSAs to be an

acceptable noise level. In view of this,

to diminish any disparity in the cost to

comply with noise limits for compressor

projects proceeding under the blanket

certificate program and those authorized

on a case-specific basis, the Commission

will revise § 157.206(b)(5)(i) by

returning to the text of the previous

§ 157.206(b)(5),8 which specifies that

noise attributable to any new

compressor station, compression added

to an existing station, or any

modification, upgrade or update of an

existing station, must not exceed an Ldn

of 55 dBA at any pre-existing NSA. This

revision will establish a noise limit for

blanket certificate compressor projects

that is consistent with the noise limit

typically required for case-specific

certificate compressor projects.

2. Notice Period

16. The Final Rule extends the time

period allotted for landowner notice for

blanket certificate activities from 30 to

45 days for automatic projects and from

45 to 60 days for prior notice projects.

INGAA proposes that rather than add 15

days to the notice periods for all blanket

certificate projects, the Commission

retain the 30- and 45-day notice periods,

but allow for a longer notice time on a

case-by-case basis as needed. INGAA

suggests the Commission delegate

authority to the Director of the Office of

Energy Projects to extend the notice

time for prior notice projects for an

additional 15 days, noting that if this

proves insufficient, the Commission

retains the option of protesting a prior

notice project. Alternatively, INGAA

proposes that a 60-day prior notice

period apply only to those mainline,

storage, LNG, and synthetic gas facilities

that are newly included under the

blanket certificate program by the Final

Rule, while the 45-day prior notice

period is retained for all other blanket

certificate projects, an approach which

8 To further enhance consistency between

compressor projects proceeding under the blanket

certificate program and those authorized on a casespecific basis, and to affirm that compressor

facilities put in place under companies’ expanded

blanket certificate authority will not have a

significant adverse environmental impact, the

Commission is proposing to modify certain notice

and environmental compliance requirements in the

contemporaneously issued NOPR in Docket No.

RM07–17–000. 119 FERC ¶ 61,304 (2007).

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

37434

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

‘‘would have the virtue of targeting the

additional notice more precisely to the

expansion of the blanket coverage.’’ 9

17. The Commission deemed it

prudent to provide an additional 15

days for notification to landowners and

the public in light of the greater size and

types of projects permitted under the

revised blanket regulations. In addition,

the Commission noted that in the past,

on occasion, it had found the shorter

time period to be insufficient for a

complete assessment of a proposed

project. Similarly, on occasion,

landowners have made claims that the

time provided is inadequate to review a

proposal and engage in meaningful

negotiations. Finally, the Commission

observed that companies, in large part,

dictate the schedule of a blanket project

by when they choose to initiate the

notice process, and commented that a

company could compensate for the

additional notification time by

beginning to contact landowners two

weeks earlier.

18. INGAA takes issue with the

Commission’s expectation that a

company can offset the additional 15day notice period by advancing initial

action on a proposed project by 15 days.

INGAA claims that a company’s

decision on when to proceed with a

proposal is ‘‘dictated by economic and

practical considerations, including

scheduling of construction to minimize

impact on flowing gas and other

customer service requirements, material

availability, and logistics to coordinate

construction contractors.’’ 10 The

Commission accepts that numerous

factors have a bearing on a company’s

deciding when to, or whether to,

undertake a blanket certificate project;

further, the Commission accepts that

companies have incomplete control over

these varying factors. Nevertheless,

although the in-service date of a project

may be affected by circumstances

beyond a company’s direct control, e.g.,

the availability of construction materials

and personnel, the Commission expects

a company to be able to anticipate and

adapt to such circumstances, and in so

doing, to factor in 15 additional days

during the planning phase. Accordingly,

the Commission continues to believe

that the dominant factor in determining

when a blanket certificate project can be

placed in service is when a company

chooses to initiate the blanket certificate

process.

19. In response to INGAA’s proposal

that the Commission adopt a shorter

notice period for projects qualifying for

9 INGAA’s Request for Rehearing and

Clarification at 12 (Nov. 20, 2006).

10 Id. at 13.

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:13 Jul 09, 2007

Jkt 211001

automatic authorization, or provide for

a sliding scale for notice time as needed,

or apply the longer times only to the

newly included types of activities, the

Commission prefers to retain a uniform

notice period applicable to all blanket

certificate projects.11 As noted, the

blanket certificate program is intended

to enable the industry and the

Commission to take advantage of the

administrative efficiency inherent in

applying a uniform set of regulatory

requirements to a restricted set of

activities. Within the context of the

blanket certificate program, the

Commission prefers to retain the

simplicity and transparency of a

uniform notification time.

3. Laterals Lines

20. The revised regulations extend

blanket certificate authority to include

pipelines used to transport only

revaporized LNG—previously, such

facilities were excluded from the

blanket certificate program. In the Final

Rule, the Commission stated the

expanded blanket certificate authority

would be inapplicable to facilities that

transport revaporized LNG from an LNG

import terminal and which are subject

to the 180-day mandatory prefiling

procedure described in § 157.21 of the

Commission’s regulations.12 However,

the Commission pointed out that a

company could employ blanket

certificate authority for facilities that

attach directly to an existing LNG

terminal, provided the construction and

operation of such facilities would not

involve modifications to the terminal

which would trigger a 180-day

mandatory prefiling process.13

21. INGAA asks whether ‘‘a lateral

directly attached to an LNG terminal

can be constructed under automatic

authorization pursuant to § 157.208(a),

or is required to be a prior notice filing

under the new § 157.212.’’ 14 The new

§ 157.212, which extends blanket

certificate authority to include laterals

directly attached to an LNG terminal,

requires prior notice pursuant to

§ 157.205 for all projects undertaken

pursuant to the new § 157.212 authority.

11 Note that the regulatory requirement for

landowner notification, 18 CFR 157.203(d)(1),

continues to allow for landowners to waive the

remaining time in the prior notice period once

notice has been provided.

12 The Commission explained that ‘‘related

jurisdictional natural gas facilities,’’ as defined by

18 CFR 153.2(e)(1), are properly reviewed in

tandem with LNG terminals in a prefiling pursuant

to 18 CFR 157.21; thus, these facilities are excluded

from the blanket certificate program.

13 See 71 FR 63680 (Oct. 31, 2006); FERC Stats.

& Regs. ¶ 31,231, P 23–24 (2006).

14 INGAA’s Request for Rehearing and

Clarification at 14 (Nov. 20, 2006).

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Projects eligible for automatic

authorization pursuant to § 157.208(a)

include those facilities defined in

§§ 157.202(b)(2)(i), 157.209(a),

157.211(a), and 157.215(a)—none of

which describe a lateral directly

attached to an LNG terminal.

Among the projects excluded from

automatic authorization are those

described in § 157.202(b)(2)(ii)(D), and

such projects include ‘‘a facility used to

receive gas * * * from plants gasifying

liquefied natural gas.’’

22. As discussed in the NOPR and the

Final Rule, the blanket certificate

program is not well suited to address

the complexity inherent in issues raised

by LNG terminals and related facilities.

The Commission concluded that:

LNG plant facilities are not within the class

of minor, well-understood, routine activities

that the blanket certificate program is

intended to embrace; LNG plant facilities

necessarily require a review of engineering,

environmental, safety, and security issues

that the Commission believes only can be

properly considered on a case-by-case basis

* * * [Thus, b]ecause an LNG terminal and

the facilities that attach directly to it are

interdependent—inextricably bound in

design and operation—a terminal and its

takeaway facilities must be evaluated in

tandem; both merit a similar degree of

regulatory scrutiny.15

In view of this, in extending blanket

certificate authority, the Commission

decided to require prior notice for all

projects involving pipelines that will

carry exclusively revaporized LNG. The

Commission affirms this decision.

4. Abandonment Authority

23. New § 157.210 permits companies

to rely on blanket certificate authority to

‘‘acquire, construct, modify, replace,

and operate natural gas mainline

facilities, including compression and

looping’’; revised § 157.216(b)(2)

provides for the abandonment of such

facilities. INGAA asks whether the

abandonment provisions of revised

§ 157.216(b)(2) are limited to those

facilities that will be put in place under

new § 157.210, or whether the

abandonment provisions also apply to

mainline facilities that are already in

place.

24. The Commission believes the

blanket certificate program’s

§§ 157.216(b), (c), and (d) requirements

for the abandonment of mainline,

storage, LNG, and synthetic gas

facilities, which include obtaining the

written consent of any customer that

received service through the facility

during the previous 12 months, provide

adequate safeguards to ensure ‘‘that the

15 71 FR 36276 at 36279–80 (June 26, 2006); FERC

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,606 at 32,877, P 29–30 (2006).

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

present or future public convenience or

necessity permit such abandonment,’’ as

mandated by NGA section 7(b).

Consequently, the Commission clarifies

that facilities that were constructed

under case-specific authorization, but

that could now qualify for authorization

under the current blanket certificate

program criteria, may be abandoned

pursuant to the provisions

§ 157.216(b).16 Note that in considering

whether previously constructed

facilities might qualify for authorization

under the current blanket certificate

program criteria, the facilities must have

been installed subsequent to the

Commission’s implementation of the

blanket certificate program and the

facilities’ original cost must have met

the § 157.208 project cost cap in effect

at the time of their construction.

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

5. Annual Report

25. The Final Rule directs companies

to include certain additional

information in the annual report

summarizing the previous year’s blanket

certificate activities. INGAA notes that

the revised reporting requirements of

§ 157.208(e) apply to ‘‘each facility

completed during the calendar year,’’

and is concerned that this could require

companies to include the additional

information specified in the Final Rule

in the annual report covering projects

commenced or completed in 2006.

INGAA complains it would be

unreasonable to include such projects,

since companies had no notice that the

additional information specified in the

Final Rule would need to be provided

in the annual report covering 2006

projects. INGAA contends that gathering

the newly specified information would

be impractical, as such information is

‘‘scattered, was never compiled or has

not been retained in a form that is easily

pulled together for the filing.’’ 17

Therefore, INGAA requests the

regulations be clarified or revised so as

to apply prospectively only to projects

begun after the effective date of the rule

on January 2, 2007.

26. The Commission observes, as it

did in response to comments objecting

to the burden of reporting the additional

information, that companies are already

required to report the information in

question. Consequently, setting out the

information in an annual report should

not constitute any hardship.

16 See Revision of Existing Regulations Under the

Natural Gas Act, Order No. 603–A, 64 FR 54522 at

54533–34 (Oct. 7, 1999), FERC Stats. & Regs.

¶ 31,081 at 30,936 (1999), in which a similar

approach was adopted with respect to automatic

abandonments under 19 CFR 157.216(a).

17 INGAA’s Request for Rehearing and

Clarification at 16 (Nov. 20, 2006).

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:13 Jul 09, 2007

Jkt 211001

Nevertheless, the Commission accepts

INGAA contention that companies may

not have the required information

readily available with respect to projects

completed or initiated in 2006.

Therefore, the Commission clarifies the

applicability of the reporting

requirement as requested, and specifies

that the annual report’s inclusion of the

information described in § 157.208(e)

will apply prospectively to projects

begun on or after January 2, 2007, and

will not apply retrospectively to projects

underway before this date.

27. The Final Rule added § 157.207(c),

which stated that the annual report

should include information on storage

facility remediation and maintenance

activities qualifying for automatic

authorization under § 157.213(a), but

neglected to further describe the

information to be included in the

annual report. The Commission will

correct the oversight here, as well as

clarify that all activities undertaken

pursuant to the new §§ 157.210,

157.212, and 157.213 are to be included

in the annual report described in

§ 157.207.

28. New § 157.207(c) will be removed,

and instead § 157.207(a), which lists

activities to be included in the annual

report, will be modified to cover

activities subject to the expanded

blanket certificate authority, and will

require that each new facility authorized

by §§ 157.208, 157.210, 157.212, or

157.213, companies provide the

information specified in § 157.208(e).

The reporting requirements for the

expanded blanket certificate activities

will duplicate those for the existing

blanket certificate activities, whereby

the annual report includes the

information described in

§ 157.208(e)(1)–(5) for automatic

authorization projects and includes the

information described in § 157.208(e)(3)

for prior notice projects. To accomplish

this, § 157.208(e) will be modified to

include a reference to facilities

completed during the calendar year

pursuant to §§ 157.210, 157.212, and

157.213.

D. Landowner Notification

29. In response to a query regarding

the manner in which notification of a

proposed blanket certificate project is to

be presented to landowners, the

Commission will modify

§§ 157.203(d)(1) and (2) to clarify that

landowner notification be in writing.

30. New §§ 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(C) and

(D) direct a company to instruct

landowners that if they are not satisfied,

they ‘‘should’’ contact the company or

Commission Hotline. This instruction

will be altered from ‘‘should’’ to ‘‘may,’’

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

37435

to stress that such contact is an option,

not an obligation, on the part of

landowners. To ensure landowners

understand how to contact the

Commission’s Enforcement Hotline, and

to ensure that the contact information is

up to date, § 157.203(d)(1)(iii)(D) will be

modified to direct a company to provide

the Commission’s Enforcement Hotline

at the current telephone number and email address in its notification.

III. Information Collection Statement

31. The Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) regulations require that

OMB approve certain information

collection requirements imposed by an

agency.18 The Final Rule’s revisions to

the information collection requirements

for blanket certificate projects were

approved under OMB Control Nos.

1902–0128 and 1902–0060. While this

rule clarifies aspects of the existing

information collection requirements for

the blanket certificate program, it does

not add to these requirements.

Accordingly, a copy of this final rule

will be sent to OMB for informational

purposes only.

IV. Document Availability

32. In addition to publishing the full

text of this document in the Federal

Register, the Commission provides all

interested persons an opportunity to

view and print the contents of this

document via the Internet through

FERC’s Web site (http://www.ferc.gov)

and in FERC’s Public Reference Room

during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.

to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First

Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC

20426. User assistance is available for

FERC’s Web site during normal business

hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time,

Monday to Friday) from FERC’s Online

Support at 202–502–6652, toll free at 1–

866–208–3676, or by e-mail at

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, and from

the Public Reference Room at 202–502–

8371, TTY at 202–502–8659, or by email at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

V. Effective Date 19

33. The amendments in this final rule

are effective August 9, 2007, except that

the amendment to § 157.206 (b)(5)(i) is

effective November 7, 2007. Requests for

clarification are granted and denied, and

requests for rehearing are denied,

effective August 9, 2007. The request for

rehearing with respect to the

measurement of compressor noise is

granted, effective November 7, 2007.

18 5 CFR 1320.11.

19 The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 801 regarding

Congressional review of rulemaking, do not apply

to this order on rehearing, since it clarifies agency

procedure and practice.

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1

37436

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 10, 2007 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 157

§ 157.207

Administrative practice and

procedure, Natural gas, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

*

By the Commission.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the

§ 157.208

Commission amends part 157, Chapter I,

Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as

follows:

PART 157—APPLICATIONS FOR

CERTIFICATES OF PUBLIC

CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY AND

FOR ORDERS PERMITTING AND

APPROVING ABANDONMENT UNDER

SECTION 7 OF THE NATURAL GAS

ACT

■ 1. The authority citation for part 157

continues to read as follows:

§ 157.203

[Amended]

Standard conditions.

*

*

*

*

*

(b) * * *

(5)(i) The noise attributable to any

new compressor station, compression

added to an existing station, or any

modification, upgrade or update of an

existing station, must not exceed a daynight level (Ldn) of 55 dBA at any preexisting noise-sensitive area (such as

schools, hospitals, or residences).

*

*

*

*

*

■ 4. In § 157.207: Paragraph (c) is

removed; paragraphs (d), (e), (f), (g), (h),

and (i) are redesignated, respectively, as

paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h);

and paragraph (a) is revised to read as

follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005

15:13 Jul 09, 2007

Jkt 211001

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 520

Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs;

Deracoxib

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

■ a. In paragraph (e), in the first

ACTION: Final rule.

sentence, after the phrase ‘‘pursuant to

paragraph (a) of this section,’’ the phrase

‘‘and § 157.213(a),’’ is added; and

■ b. In paragraph (e), in the second

sentence, after the phrase ‘‘pursuant to

paragraph (b) of this section,’’ the

phrase ‘‘and §§ 157.210, 157.212, and

157.213(b),’’ is added.

§ 157.213

facilities.

after the phrase ‘‘unless the company

makes a good faith effort to notify,’’ the

phrase ‘‘in writing’’ is added;

■ b. In paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(C), ‘‘should’’

is removed and the word ‘‘may’’ is

inserted in its place;

■ c. In paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(D), ‘‘should’’

is removed and the word ‘‘may’’ is

inserted in its place;

■ d. In paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(D),

immediately before the period that

concludes the sentence, the phrase ‘‘at

the current telephone number and email address, which is to be provided in

the notification’’ is added; and

■ e. In paragraph (d)(2), immediately

after the phrase ‘‘the company shall

make a good faith effort to notify,’’ the

phrase ‘‘in writing’’ is added.

■ 3. In § 157.206, paragraph (b)(5)(i) is

revised to read as follows:

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

■ 5. In § 157.208:

introductory text of paragraph (c) are

revised to read as follows:

■ 2. In § 157.203:

■ a. In paragraph (d)(1), immediately

§ 157.206

[Amended]

■ 6. In § 157.213, paragraph (b) and the

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717w.

rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES

General reporting requirements.

*

*

*

*

(a) For each new facility authorized

by §§ 157.208, 157.210, 157.212, or

157.213, the information specified in

§ 157.208(e);

*

*

*

*

*

Underground storage field

*

*

*

*

*

(b) Prior Notice. Subject to the notice

requirements of §§ 157.205(b) and

157.208(c), the certificate holder is

authorized to acquire, construct,

modify, replace, and operate natural gas

underground storage facilities, provided

the storage facility’s certificated

physical parameters—including total

inventory, reservoir pressure, reservoir

and buffer boundaries, and certificated

capacity remain unchanged—and

provided compliance with

environmental and safety provisions is

not affected. The cost of a project may

not exceed the cost limitation provided

in column 2 of Table I in § 157.208(d).

the certificate holder must not segment

projects in order to meet this cost

limitation.

(c) Contents of request. In addition to

the requirements of §§ 157.206(b) and

157.208(c), requests for activities

authorized under paragraph (b) of this

section must contain, to the extent

necessary to demonstrate that the

proposed project will not alter a storage

reservoir’s total inventory, reservoir

pressure, reservoir or buffer boundaries,

or certificated capacity:

*

*

*

*

*

[FR Doc. E7–12560 Filed 7–9–07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is amending the

animal drug regulations to reflect

approval of a supplemental new animal

drug application (NADA) filed by

Novartis Animal Health US, Inc. The

supplemental NADA provides for the

addition of a 75-milligram size

deracoxib tablet which is used for the

control of pain and inflammation in

dogs.

DATES: This rule is effective July 10,

2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melanie R. Berson, Center for Veterinary

Medicine (HFV–110), Food and Drug

Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,

Rockville, MD 20855, 301–827–7540, email: melanie.berson@fda.hhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Novartis

Animal Health US, Inc., 3200 Northline

Ave., suite 300, Greensboro, NC 27408,

filed a supplement to NADA 141–203

that provides for the addition of a 75milligram size of DERAMAXX

(deracoxib) Chewable Tablets, used for

the control of pain and inflammation in

dogs. The supplemental NADA is

approved as of June 13, 2007, and the

regulations are amended in 21 CFR

520.538 to reflect the approval.

In accordance with the freedom of

information provisions of 21 CFR part

20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii), a

summary of safety and effectiveness

data and information submitted to

support approval of this application

may be seen in the Division of Dockets

Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug

Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.

1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday.

The agency has determined under 21

CFR 25.33(a)(1) that this action is of a

type that does not individually or

cumulatively have a significant effect on

the human environment. Therefore,

neither an environmental assessment

nor an environmental impact statement

is required.

This rule does not meet the definition

of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because

it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’

E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM

10JYR1