54738 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 

3 July 1 Order, 112 FERC ¶ 61,013 at P 37. 

1 112 FERC ¶ 61,150 (2005). 

• What impediments exist to 

implementing SCNP, and how long would it 

take to implement it; 

• What impact SCNP would have on other 

current demand response programs. 

III. Establishment of LAP Zones for 

Wholesale Customers: Discussion of issues 

and potential impacts of allowing individual 

wholesale customers to establish their own 

LAP zones.3

IV. Demand Response and the CAISO 

Tariff: Overview of California’s demand 

response policies and programs by the State 

agencies. Participants will have the 

opportunity to discuss, among other things: 

• How successful demand response has 

been this summer; 

• How demand response fits into CAISO’s 

current and MRTU tariff; 

• What is/is not working with respect to 

demand response; 

• The role of the CAISO in procuring 

demand response; 

• The coordination among all players in 

demand response. 

[FR Doc. E5–5065 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. RP05–422–000] 

El Paso Natural Gas Company; 

Technical Conference Agenda 

September 9, 2005. 

On July 29, 2005, the Commission 

issued an order in this proceeding 1 that 

directed Staff to convene a technical 

conference to discuss issues raised by El 

Paso’s tariff filing. On August 11, 2005, 

a notice was issued scheduling the 

technical conference for Tuesday, 

September 20, 2005 and continuing 

through Wednesday, September 21, 

2005. The August 11, 2005 notice stated 

that an agenda for the conference would 

be issued in a subsequent notice. The 

agenda attached to this notice lists the 

issues for discussion in the order in 

which they will be addressed at the twoday technical conference. The 

conference on Tuesday, September 20, 

2005 will start at 10 a.m. (EST) and end 

by 5 p.m. and continue on Wednesday, 

September 21, 2005 at 9 a.m. 

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E5–5060 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. AD05–14–000] 

State of the Natural Gas Infrastructure 

Conference; Notice of Public 

Conference 

September 9, 2005. 

Take notice that a public conference 

will be held on October 12, 2005, from 

approximately 9 a.m. until 3 p.m. 

Eastern Time, in the Commission 

Meeting Room on the second floor of the 

offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC. All interested persons 

may attend; there is no fee or 

registration. Commissioners are 

expected to participate. 

The conference will focus on issues 

related to the development of natural 

gas pipeline infrastructure. Discussion 

will include changes in the industry 

that impact infrastructure development, 

regulatory impediments, financial risks 

involved, and suggestions for regulatory 

improvements. The Commission also is 

interested in hearing about the state of 

Gulf Coast facilities following Hurricane 

Katrina, and what steps may need to be 

taken to restore or upgrade pipeline 

infrastructure in that region. 

The Commission is now soliciting 

nominations for speakers at the 

conference. Persons wishing to 

nominate themselves as speakers should 

do so using this electronic link: 

https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/ 

registration/speaker-1012-form.asp. 

Such nominations must be made by 

close of business, Friday, September 16, 

2005, to enable staff to develop an 

agenda. 

Transcripts of the conference will be 

immediately available from Ace 

Reporting Company (202–347–3700 or 

1–800–336–6646) for a fee. They will be 

available for the public on the 

Commission’s eLibrary system seven 

calendar days after FERC receives the 

transcript. Additionally, Capitol 

Connection offers the opportunity for 

remote listening and viewing of the 

conference. It is available for a fee, live 

over the Internet, by phone, or via 

satellite. Persons interested in receiving 

the broadcast, or who need information 

on making arrangements should contact 

David Reininger or Julia Morelli at the 

Capitol Connection (703–993–3100) as 

soon as possible or visit the Capitol 

Connection Web site at http:// 

www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu and 

click on ‘‘FERC.’’

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 

866–208–3372 (voice) or 202–208–1659 

(TTY), or send a FAX to 202–208–2106 

with the required accommodations. 

Additional details and the agenda for 

this conference will be included in a 

subsequent notice. 

For more information about the 

conference, please contact John Schnagl 

at (202) 502–8756 

(john.schnagl@ferc.gov) or Sarah 

McKinley at (202) 502–8004 

(sarah.mckinley@ferc.gov). 

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E5–5062 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[R04–OAR–2005–TN–00006–200525; FRL–

7970–1] 

Adequacy Status of the Nashville 1- 

Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Update 

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) submitted in the 

Nashville (Middle Tennessee) 1-hour 

ozone maintenance plan update, dated 

August 10, 2005, by the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), are adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes. On 

March 2, 1999, the DC Circuit Court 

ruled that MVEBs submitted in state 

implementation plans (SIPs) cannot be 

used for transportation conformity 

determinations until EPA has 

affirmatively found them adequate. As a 

result of EPA’s finding, the Nashville 

area can use the MVEBs from the 

submitted Nashville 1-hour ozone 

maintenance plan update for future 

conformity determinations. 

DATES: These MVEBs are effective 

October 3, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amanetta Wood, 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. 

Wood can also be reached by telephone 

at (404) 562–9025, or via electronic mail 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices 54739 

at wood.amanetta@epa.gov. The finding 

is available at EPA’s conformity Web 

site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

transp.htm (once there, click on the 

‘‘Transportation Conformity’’ text icon, 

then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP 

Submissions’’). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Today’s notice is simply an 

announcement of a finding that EPA has 

already made. EPA Region 4 sent a letter 

to TDEC on August 16, 2005, stating that 

the MVEBs submitted in the Nashville 

1-hour ozone maintenance plan update 

dated August 10, 2005, are adequate. 

EPA’s adequacy comment period ran 

from June 9 through July 11, 2005. This 

finding has also been announced on 

EPA’s conformity Web site: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/transp.htm, (once 

there, click ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity’’ text icon, then look for 

‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP 

Submissions’’). The adequate MVEBs 

are provided in the following table: 

NASHVILLE AREA MVEBS

[Tons per day] 

2016 

VOC ............................................ 21.93 

NOX ............................................ 45.76 

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 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 EPA determines 

whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes are 

outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please 

note that an adequacy review is separate 

from EPA’s SIP submittal completeness 

review, and it also should not be used 

to prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval of 

the SIP. Even if EPA finds the MVEBs 

adequate, the Agency may later 

determine that the SIP itself is not 

approvable. 

EPA has described the process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP budgets in guidance (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 PM2.5 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). 

Dated: September 1, 2005. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 05–18424 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6667–5] 

Environmental Impact Statements and 

Regulations; Availability of EPA 

Comments 

Availability of EPA comments 

prepared pursuant to the Environmental 

Review Process (ERP), under section 

309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 

102(2)(c) of the National Environmental 

Policy Act as amended. Requests for 

copies of EPA comments can be directed 

to the Office of Federal Activities at 

202–564–7167. 

An explanation of the ratings assigned 

to draft environmental impact 

statements (EISs) was published in FR 

dated April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815). 

Draft EISs 

EIS No. 20050202, ERP No. D-CGDA03086–00, Programmatic—Vessel 

and Facility Response Plans for Oil: 

2003 Removal Equipment 

Requirements and Alternative 

Technology Revisions, To Increase the 

Oil Removal Capability, U.S. 

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), 

United States, Alaska, Guam, Puerto 

Rico and other U.S. Territories. 

Summary: EPA expressed concerns 

related to the synergistic effects of 

chemical dispersants with oil on water 

quality and organisms within the water 

column, spill modeling, and model 

limitations for the fate and effect of 

chemically dispersed oil. 

Rating EC2 

EIS No. 20050235, ERP No. D–NPS–

F65057–IN, Lincoln Boyhood 

National Memorial General 

Management Plan, Implementation, 

Lincoln City, Spencer County, IN. 

Summary: EPA has no objections to 

the proposed action. 

Rating LO 

EIS No. 20050266, ERP No. D–DOE–

A00171–00, Proposed Consolidation 

of Nuclear Operations Related to 

Production of radioisotope Power 

Systems, Located or Planned Sites: 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

(ORNL), Tennessee; Los Alamos 

National Laboratory (LANL), New 

Mexico; and the Idaho National 

Laboratory (INL), Idaho, TN, NM, ID. 

Summary: EPA has no objections to 

the proposed action. 

Rating LO 

EIS No. 20050310, ERP No. D–JUS–

G81013–TX, Laredo Detention 

Facility, Proposed Contractor-Owned/ 

Contractor-Operated Detention 

Facility, Implementation, Webb 

County, TX. 

Summary: EPA has no objections to 

the proposed action. 

Rating LO 

EIS No. 20050300, ERP No. DS–NOA–

E55555–00, Reef Fish (Amendment 

25) and Coastal Migratory Pelagic 

(Amendment 17) for Extending the 

Charter Vessel/Headboat Permit 

Moratorium, Gulf of Mexico and 

South Atlantic. 

Summary: EPA agrees with the 

extension of the permit moratorium, but 

recommended that any available 

moratorium data be evaluated and 

summarized in the FSEIS as part of the 

decision-making process. 

Rating LO 

Final EISs 

EIS No. 20050270, ERP No. F–NRC–

E06024–AL, Generic—License 

Renewal of Nuclear Plants for Browns 

Ferry, Unit 1, 2 and 33 (TAC Nos. 

MC7168, MC1769, and MC1770), 

Supplement 21 to NUREG–1437, 

Implementation, Athens, AL. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns because of the 

uncertainty of the ultimate location of a 

permitted repository site for the 

radioactive waste. 

EIS No. 20050317, ERP No. F–NAS–

E12007–FL, New Horizons Mission to 

Pluto, Continued Preparations and 

Implementation to Explore Pluto and 

Potentially the Recently Discovered 

Kuiper Belt, Cape Canaveral Air Force 

Station, FL. 

Summary: EPA’s previous issues have 

been resolved therefore, EPA has no 

objection to the proposed action. 

EIS No. 20050334, ERP No. F–DOE–

J91000–MT, South Fork Flathead 

Watershed Westslope Cutthroat Trout 

Conservation Program, Preserve the