### 34734 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY**

**Federal Energy Regulatory Commission** 

**[Docket No. AD10–12–000]**

**Improving Market and Planning Efficiency Through Improved Software;**  **Notice of Agenda and Procedures for Staff Technical Conference** 

June 10, 2010.

This notice establishes the agenda and procedures for the staff technical conference to be held on June 23 and June 24, 2010 to discuss issues related to enhanced optimal power flow models and software. The technical conference will be held from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. e.d.t. on June 23, 2010, and from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. e.d.t. on June 24, 2010 at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in the Commission Meeting Room. All interested persons are invited to attend, and registration is not required.

The agenda for this conference is attached. The presentations will be technical in nature, and the session times shown on the agenda include approximately 10 minutes for questions or discussion after each presentation. Equipment will be available for computer presentations. Presenters who wish to include comments, presentations, or handouts in the record for this proceeding should file their comments with the Commission. Comments may either be filed on paper or electronically via the eFiling link on the Commission’s Web site at http:// www.ferc.gov.

A free webcast of this event is available through http://www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating to http://www.ferc.gov ’s Calendar of Events and locating this event in the calendar. The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit http://www.CapitolConnection.org or call (703) 993–3100.

FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an e-mail

to accessibility@ferc.gov or call toll free 1–866–208–3372 (voice) or 202–208– 8659 (TTY), or send a fax to 202–208– 2106 with the required accommodations.

For further information about this conference, please contact: Tom Dautel (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and Innovation, (202) 502–6196, Thomas.Dautel@ferc.gov. Eric Krall (Technical Information),

Office of Energy Policy and Innovation, (202) 502–6214, Eric.Krall@ferc.gov.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. Agenda for AD10–12 Staff Technical Conference on Enhanced Power Flow Models
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
9 a.m. Welcome and introduction,

Richard O’Neill, FERC.
9:20 a.m. Session A.

Rick Gonzales, New York ISO, Voltage

and Reactive Management. Slava Maslennikov, ISO New

England, Enhancement of Dispatch by Utilization of Adaptive
Transmission Rates. 10:30 a.m. Break.
10:45 a.m. Session B.

Andy Ott, PJM, Development of

Enhanced Generation/Demand Response Control Algorithm. Vladimir Brandwajn and Show

Chang, ABB, Optimal Power Flow in Energy Markets: Current Practices and Future Directions. Noon Lunch. 1:15 p.m. Session C.

David Sun, Alstom, Challenges with

Practical Usage of Large-Scale Optimal Power Flow. Herminio Pinto, Nexant, AC Optimal

Power Flow for Day-Ahead Reactive Planning. 2:25 p.m. Break. 2:40 p.m. Session D.

Marija Ilic, Carnegie Mellon

University and NETSS, Inc., Jeffrey Lang, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, NETSSWorks Software: An Extended AC Optimal Power Flow (AC XOPF) for Managing Available System
Resources. 3:40 p.m. Break. 3:50 p.m. Session E.

Malcolm Metcalfe, Sempa Power

Systems, Low-Cost Fast Regulation with Load-Based Regulation Services Network. Franz Franchetti, Carnegie Mellon

University, Trends in HighPerformance Computing for Power Grid Applications. 5 p.m. Day 1 Conclusion,

Richard O’Neill, FERC.
Thursday, June 24, 2010 9 a.m. Day 2 Welcome, Richard O’Neill, FERC.
9:20 a.m. Session F.

Marija Ilic, Carnegie Mellon

University and NETSS, Inc., AC Optimal Power Flow and Smart Grids. Cong Liu, Argonne National

Laboratory, Large-Scale Power Grid Simulation. 10:30 a.m. Break.
10:45 a.m. Session G.

Sven Leyffer, Argonne National

Laboratory, AC Networks and Mixed-Discrete Global Optimization. Srinivas Musunuri, AREVA T&D,

Enhanced LP–Based Optimal Power Flow for Transmission Operations. Noon Lunch. 1:15 p.m. Session H.

Ray Zimmerman, Cornell University,

SuperOPF Framework. Sandy Aivaliotis, The Valley Group,

Dynamic Line Ratings. 2:25 p.m. Break. 2:40 p.m. Session I.

Herminio Pinto, Nexant, SecurityConstrained Economic Dispatch with Post-Contingency Corrective
Actions. 3:15 p.m. Day 2 Conclusion,

Richard O’Neill, FERC.

[FR Doc. 2010–14720 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6717–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0255–201017; FRL– 9163–9]** 

**Adequacy Status of the Kentucky Portion of the Huntington-Ashland Tri**  **State Area 1997 Annual PM** 2.5 **Attainment Demonstration Insignificance Finding for**  **Transportation Conformity Purposes**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of Adequacy.

**SUMMARY :**  In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that EPA has made an insignificance finding through the transportation conformity adequacy process for directly emitted fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) and nitrogen oxides (NO X ) emissions as contained in the 1997 PM 2.5 attainment demonstration for the Kentucky portion of the tri-state Huntington-Ashland nonattainment area. The tri-state Huntington-Ashland 1997 annual PM 2.5 nonattainment area is comprised of Boyd County, Kentucky; Cabell and Wayne Counties, West Virginia; Lawrence and Scioto Counties, Ohio;


### 34735 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices

and the partial Counties of Lawrence in Kentucky; Mason in West Virginia; and Adams and Gallia in Ohio. On December 5, 2008, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Division of Air Quality (DAQ), submitted an attainment demonstration for the 1997 annual PM 2.5 standard for the Kentucky portion of the tri-state Huntington-Ashland area (hereafter referred to as the Ashland Area). As a result of EPA’s insignificance finding, the Ashland Area is no longer required to perform regional emissions analyses for either directly emitted PM 2.5 or NO X as part of future
PM 2.5 conformity determinations for the 1997 annual PM 2.5 air quality standard. This finding only relates to the Kentucky portion of the tri-state Huntington-Ashland 1997 PM 2.5 nonattainment area. In a letter dated October 23, 2009, EPA informed the State of Ohio that regional mobile emissions of direct PM 2.5 and NO X are insignificant for transportation conformity purposes as well. That insignificance finding took effect on December 22, 2009. EPA will review the adequacy of the West Virginia submittal in a separate action.

**DATES :**  This insignificance finding for direct PM 2.5 and NO X is effective July 6,

2010.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dianna Smith, Environmental Scientist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, Air Quality Modeling and Transportation Section, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Ms. Smith can also be reached by telephone at (404) 562–9207, or via electronic mail at smith.dianna@epa.gov. The finding is available at EPA’s conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This notice is simply an announcement of a finding that EPA has already made. EPA sent a letter to DAQ on March 23, 2010, stating that regional direct PM 2.5 and
NO X emissions are insignificant from mobile sources as provided in the Kentucky portion of the 1997 annual
PM 2.5 attainment demonstration for the tri-state Huntington-Ashland area. The Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted the 1997 annual PM 2.5 attainment demonstration for the Ashland Area on December 5, 2008. Ohio and West Virginia provided separate submittals for their portion of this Area and EPA is addressing these submissions in actions separate from today’s action. EPA posted the availability of the insignificance finding for the Ashland Area on EPA’s Web site on September 8, 2009, as part of the adequacy process, for the purpose of soliciting comments. The comment period for Kentucky’s submission ran from September 8, 2009, through October 8, 2009. During EPA’s adequacy comment period for Kentucky’s submission, no comments were received on the insignificance finding for the Ashland Area. Through this notice, EPA is informing the public of the insignificance finding for direct
PM 2.5 and NO X for the purpose of implementing transportation conformity in the Ashland Area for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard. EPA’s findings have also been announced on EPA’s conformity Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990. 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 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. On March 2, 1999, the District of Columbia Circuit Court ruled that submitted State Implementation Plans (SIPs) cannot be used for transportation conformity determinations until EPA has affirmatively found them adequate.

The criteria by which EPA determines whether a SIP’s motor vehicle budget is adequate for transportation conformity purposes are outlined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93.118(e)(4). The Transportation Conformity Rule in 40 CFR 93.109(k) states that a regional emissions analysis is no longer necessary if EPA finds through the adequacy or approval process that a SIP demonstrates that regional motor vehicle emissions are an insignificant contributor to the air quality problem for that pollutant/precursor. A finding of insignificance does not change the requirement for a regional analysis for other pollutants/precursors; the area’s obligation to meet other transportation conformity requirements ( i.e., other than the regional emissions analysis); anddoes not change the requirement for hotspot analysis. ( See 73 FR 4419, January 24, 2008.) 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 attainment demonstration plan for the Ashland Area. Even if EPA finds the insignificance finding for direct PM 2.5 and NO X adequate, the attainment demonstration plan could later be disapproved.

Transportation partners should note this insignificance finding in future transportation conformity determinations. Additionally, while this insignificance finding waives the requirements for regional emissions analyses for direct PM 2.5 and NO X for the Ashland Area for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard, as mentioned above, it does not waive other conformity requirements for the 1997 PM 2.5 standard for the Ashland Area, nor does it waive transportation conformity requirements for other pollutants/ precursors for which the Area may be designated nonattainment or redesignated to attainment with a maintenance plan.

EPA has described the process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in a May 14, 1999, memorandum entitled ‘‘ Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision. ’’ EPA has followed this guidance in making this adequacy determination. This guidance is incorporated into EPA’s July 1, 2004, final rulemaking entitled ‘‘ Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes ’’ (69 FR 40004).

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 9, 2010. Beverly H. Banister, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 2010–14774 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0260–201019; FRL– 9164–1]** 

**Adequacy Status of the Alabama Portion (Jackson County) of the**  **Chattanooga, Tennessee Tri-State Area 1997 Annual PM**  2.5 **Attainment Demonstration Insignificance Finding**  **for Transportation Conformity Purposes** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of Adequacy.

**SUMMARY :**  In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that EPA has made an insignificance finding through the transportation conformity adequacy