The major requirement under SBREFA is a regulatory flexibility analysis of all rules that have a " significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities." This ICR is not associated with new rules. Therefore, this ICR is not subject to the SBREFA. When the initial Stage 1 DBPR ICR was prepared for the initial implementation phase of the rule, EPA completed an RFA because it had determined that the rule would have a significant impact on small systems. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 60 However, EPA has made significant efforts to minimize the burden for all respondents, particularly for small entities. In setting both MCLs/ MRDLs and monitoring requirements, EPA has been able to minimize burden for small entities in the following ways   1) Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule EPA has taken steps to minimize the burden on small PWSs. These measures include lower monitoring frequency for small systems, reducing monitoring frequency for systems consistently and reliably below the MCLs and MRDLs, and extending the compliance date for small systems to five years after promulgation of the rule.

2) Chemical Phase Rules For the contaminants regulated under the Phase II regulation, the provisions established in the SMF are intended to minimize burden on small entities by allowing systems to composite as many as five samples and by allowing States to grant waivers, which reduce or eliminate monitoring requirements.

For Phase V chemicals, EPA has taken steps to minimize the burden on PWSs ( in addition to the provisions listed for Phase II contaminants) by allowing systems serving fewer than 3,300 people to composite among different systems provided the five sample limit is maintained. Sample collection has also been simplified by allowing the same sampling locations to be used for all source water related monitoring.

3) Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule 1, Lists 1 and 2 EPA has estimated the impact of the UCMR 1 and concluded that the impact on small water systems will not be significant. The rationale for this conclusion is that EPA plans to pay the full costs of shipping and testing samples for small systems and does not plan, under any scenario, to ask systems to pay these costs. Thus, the costs to these systems will be limited to the labor hours associated with collecting a sample and preparing it for shipping. System costs under both a " Full Assessment Monitoring Implementation" and " Limited Assessment Monitoring Implementation" scenario were estimated to ensure that small systems would not incur significant economic impacts under any circumstances. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 61 4) 1976 Radionuclides Rule and 2000 Radionuclides Rule The monitoring requirements for radionuclides apply only to CWSs and specify different monitoring frequencies depending on the type of source water. Ground water systems have less stringent monitoring requirements and since most small systems use ground water, the rule imposes less burden on such systems. Specifically, ground water systems must sample at least once every four years, while surface water systems must take four consecutive quarterly samples once every four years. Additionally, gross beta analysis is required only for surface water systems serving at least 10,000 people.

5) Total Trihalomethanes Rule The Stage 1 DBPR completely supercedes the TTHM Rule, eliminating a separate TTHM Rule burden. Also, the TTHM Rule did not apply to small PWSs, only to those serving at least 10,000 people.

6) Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and Associated Activities under the SWTR The rule allows systems serving 3,300 and fewer to substitute grab sampling for continuous disinfectant residual monitoring. This enables small systems to avoid capital costs associated with continuous monitoring equipment. Further, the number of daily grab samples required for measuring the disinfectant residual is directly related to the system's size. Systems serving 500 or fewer people are required to take one sample, while systems serving 2,501 to 3,300 people are required to take four samples.

7) Arsenic Rule In the Arsenic Rule, in order to assist small entities, States will grant monitoring waivers to systems that are reliably and consistently below the MCL. These waivers will reduce the compliance cost for some small systems and will decrease the number of times a system must conduct routine monitoring. In addition, the monitoring requirements still allows systems to composite up to five samples. Compositing samples allows systems to reduce the laboratory costs associated with monitoring.

8) Lead and Copper Rule In developing the LCR and its modifications, EPA considered SBREFA to minimize the burden of information collections on small entities. However, while preparing the LCRMR, EPA determined that the LCR would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 62 EPA recognizes that some water systems are small entities; therefore, the LCR reduced to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on PWSs, especially smaller systems. The regulations include the following examples of reduced burden for small systems:

Different compliance or reporting requirements or schedules that take into account the resources available to smaller water systems.

Consolidated or simplified compliance and reporting requirements.

No unnecessary or redundant requirements.

5( d) Collection Schedule Exhibit 6 contains a summary of the collection schedules for each rule. Given the wide range of phase in schedules for the respective rules, additional information may be obtained by consulting the individual rules for specific collection schedules. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 19 Collection schedule is based on the commencement of monitoring requirements. Startup activities are typically completed prior to these dates.

63 Exhibit 6 Collection Schedule19 Rule Collection Commencement 1976 Radionuclides Rule 1978 TTHM 1980/ 1982 ( depending on system size). Superceded by the Stage 1 DBPR beginning in 2002/ 2004.

Disinfectant residual monitoring and associated activities for the SWTR 1991/ 1993 ( depending on filtration status).

Phase II 1993 Phase IIB 1993 Phase V 1996 UCMR 1 2001 Stage 1 DBPR 2002/ 2004 ( depending on system size and source).

2000 Radionuclides Rule 2003 Arsenic Rule 2006/ 2007 ( depending on source)

Lead and Copper Rule 1994 Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 20 The remaining SWTR requirements are included in the Microbial Rules ICR.

21 The State Workload Model is a spreadsheet model used by States/ Primacy Agencies to estimate resource needs for implementation of drinking water regulations.

64 6 ESTIMATING BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTION This section estimates the burden and cost to PWSs, primacy agencies, and EPA for complying with drinking water information collection requirements associated with chemical contaminant related rulemakings. These rulemakings include the following   1) Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule 2) Chemical Phase Rules 3) Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, Lists 1 and 2 4) 1976 Radionuclides Rule and 2000 Radionuclides Rule 5) Total Trihalomethanes Rule 6) Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and Associated Activities under the Surface Water Treatment Rule20 7) Arsenic Rule 8) Lead and Copper Rule This section also discusses the assumptions used to estimate burden and costs and describes the change in annual burden, as compared with the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. This ICR updates the annual burdens and costs associated with these rulemakings for years 2005 through 2007.

EPA is committed to accurately characterizing the burden and costs of rules it promulgates. Consequently, EPA has refined some of the assumptions for calculating the burden and costs associated with implementing the drinking water regulations contained in this ICR. For this update, many assumptions were revised based on program changes and well documented changes in some data. To provide a comparable basis on which to calculate the requirements addressed by the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and to address inconsistencies, EPA applied uniform assumptions to all rules. The categories of assumptions are listed below.

° Labor rates   for PWSs, a mean hourly rate of $ 17.09, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS), with an overhead rate of 60 percent; for States, the hourly rate from the most recent State Workload Model. 21 ° PWS inventory figures from the most recent frozen SDWIS database pull. ° Number of entry points   data from the 1995 Community Water System Survey ( CWSS). ° Number of plants   data from the 1995 CWSS. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 22 Includes costs for ground water systems only. Disinfectant residual monitoring and associated activities for surface water systems are addressed by the SWTR.

65 6( a) Respondent Burden 6( a)( i) Burden to Public Water Systems The annual PWS burden for years 2005 through 2007 is estimated to be approximately 4.30 million hours. Exhibit 7 ( at the end of Section 6( b)) shows the annual burden hours on a rulespecific basis. Wherever possible, activity level burden assumptions were carried forward from previous ICRs. However, if updated data were available ( e. g., system inventories), those data were used in burden calculations. Appendices B through H show the assumptions and detailed burden calculations for each rule. The following further describes the bases for the burden estimates for each rule.

1) Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule Activities associated with the Stage 1 DBPR account for 0.71 million annual burden hours. The assumptions used to calculate the Stage 1 DBPR burden are based largely on assumptions from the September 1998 Information Collection Request for the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule ( Stage 1 DBPR ICR). The burden for systems includes only monitoring. Based on the rule's implementation schedule, the startup burden for systems was included in prior ICRs. The specific burden for monitoring includes the following

Paired TTHM/ HAA5

Alkalinity and paired TOC

Bromate

Chloride Dioxide

Chlorite ( both daily and monthly monitoring)

Chlorine or chloramines ( in the distribution system) 22 At this point, reduced monitoring burden was not estimated for the above contaminants, with the exception of alkalinity and paired TOC monitoring, which carried forward reduced monitoring rate estimates from the September 1998 Stage 1 DBPR ICR.

Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Detailed burden and cost calculations for the Stage 1 DBPR are provided in Appendix B. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 66 2) Chemical Phase Rules Activities associated with the Chemical Phase Rules account for a burden of 0.45 million hours per year. The burden estimate includes routine and reduced sampling for IOCs, VOCs, and SOCs under the schedules dictated by the SMF. The assumptions used to calculate the Chemical Phase Rule burden are based on assumptions from the 1993 PWSS Program ICR, which maintained most assumptions and burden estimates from the individual ICRs for the Phase II, IIB, and V rules, with an adjustment to the waiver rate assumptions ( in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR) to more accurately reflect actual waiver issuance rates. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Appendix C summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the Chemical Phase Rule burden and provides the detailed burden and cost calculations.

3) Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, Lists 1 and 2 Total annual burden for PWSs for the UCMR 1 ( including List 1 and List 2 contaminants) is estimated to be 38 hours. Included in this burden is the monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for the List 1 and List 2 contaminants for index systems only. The startup activities are completed and the burden for reading the regulation and guidance materials has now dropped out. Activity level burden assumptions for this rule were carried forward from the August 1999 Information Collection Request for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation and the Information Collection Request for the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation   List 2. Reasons for changes in burden between the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR are summarized in Section 6( f). EPA will promulgate the UCMR 2 as a separate rule and its burden will be addressed by a separate ICR. Detailed information about assumptions, burden, and calculations are provided in Appendix D.

4) 1976 Radionuclides Rule and 2000 Radionuclides Rule For this ICR, all radionuclides monitoring will be addressed by the 2000 Radionuclides requirements, which completely absorb and augment the requirements established in the1976 Rule. Annual PWS burden for the 2000 Radionuclides Rule is estimated to be 0.02 million hours, which is based on burden assumptions contained in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. The large burden estimates for startup activities have dropped out, and burden for monitoring activities will continue.

Monitoring burden is for the following contaminants

Gross Alpha

Beta and photon emitters

Combined Radium 226/ 228

Uranium Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 67 Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the radionuclides burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Calculations for burden and costs for the 2000 Radionuclides Rule are included in Appendix E.

5) Total Trihalomethanes Rule For this ICR, no burden is calculated for the TTHM Rule because the Stage 1 DBPR completely absorbs the TTHM requirements and expands them to address systems serving fewer than 10,000 people and NTNCWSs.

6) Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and Associated Activities under the SWTR As stated previously, this ICR includes burden estimates only for the disinfection residual monitoring and associated activities required under the SWTR. The Microbial Rules ICR addresses the burden and costs for all other SWTR requirements. Implementation of the SWTR disinfection residual monitoring and associated activities is estimated to result in an annual PWS burden of 1.22 million hours. Included in the estimate is burden for

Distribution system residual monitoring.

Calculation of inactivation ratio using CT values.

Measurement of pH and temperature, as necessary to meet requirements.

Entry point residual monitoring for filtered systems.

Entry point residual monitoring for unfiltered systems.

Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Appendix F summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the burden for disinfection residual monitoring and associated activities under SWTR and provides the detailed burden and cost calculations.

7) Arsenic Rule This ICR addresses the burden and cost for arsenic monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping beginning in 2005. Start up activities associated with this rule have been accounted for in the previous stand alone Arsenic Rule ICR. This ICR represents the burden and costs for monitoring, which systems are required to complete by 2006 or 2007. Implementation of the Arsenic Rule is estimated to result in an annual PWS burden of 0.19 million hours. Appendix G summarizes the assumptions used to calculate burden for the Arsenic Rule and provides the detailed burden and cost estimates. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 68 8) Lead and Copper Rule The average annual respondent burden is 1.72 million hours for reporting ( including lead service line replacement reporting), recordkeeping, and public education activities of the LCR. Only CWSs and NTNCWSs incur a burden associated with LCR requirements.

Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the Lead and Copper Rule Amendment to the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. Appendix H summarizes the assumptions used to calculate the burden for the Lead and Copper Rule and provides the detailed burden and cost estimates.

6( a)( ii) Burden to Primacy Agencies The annual burden for primacy agencies is estimated to be approximately 2.12 million hours. Exhibit 8 ( at the end of Section 6( b)) shows the annual burden hours on a rule specific basis. Many other State activities, such as compliance assurance and data management, cannot be divided among specific rules and are included in the PWSS Program ICR as general primacy activities. The following briefly describes the bases for the burden estimates   1) Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule The annual State burden for the Stage 1 DBPR is expected to be 0.15 million hours. This reflects data entry and recordkeeping burden. The start up activities have been completed and have been taken into account in previous ICRs. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the Stage 1 DBPR burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Detailed calculations for burden and cost are shown in Appendix B.

2) Chemical Phase Rules For States, the annual burden associated with the Chemical Phase Rules is estimated to be approximately 1.33 million hours. This reflects reporting and recordkeeping burden for routine and reduced sampling for IOCs, VOCs, and SOCs under the schedules dictated by the SMF. Estimates for primacy agency burden for the Chemical Phase Rules are based on State Workload Model Assumptions carried forward from the 1993 PWSS Program ICR. Because it is now a part of the Arsenic Rule burden, an estimate of the burden hours associated with arsenic monitoring has been removed from the State burden. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the Chemical Phase Rules burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Detailed calculations for burden and cost are shown in Appendix C. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 69 3) Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, Lists 1 and 2 States are expected to expend 0.002 million annual burden hours implementing requirements of UCMR 1, for List 1 and List 2 contaminants. The burden includes activities such as coordinating with EPA, providing data management support, and assisting in the implementation of the program. In addition, the burden includes overhead costs for support staff related to rule specific training and staff supervision. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the UCMR 1 burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Detailed burden and costs calculations are included in Appendix D.

4) 1976 Radionuclides Rule and 2000 Radionuclides Rule For the 1976 Radionuclides Rule, there is no annual State burden because the cost and burden are now completely represented by the 2000 Radionuclides Rule. For the 2000 Radionuclides Rule, annual State burden is estimated to be 0.002 million hours. The annual State burden is based on burden assumptions contained in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. Burden is calculated for primacy agency staff for monitoring activities only because start up activities have been completed ( i. e., there is no burden or cost for these activities). Monitoring burden is derived based on recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance tracking and analysis requirements for analyses conducted by PWSs. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the radionuclides burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Calculations for cost and burden for the 2000 Rule are included in Appendix E.

5) Total Trihalomethanes Rule No burden is expected for the TTHM Rule because this burden is now completely covered under the Stage 1 DBPR.

6) Disinfectant Residual Monitoring and Associated Activities for under SWTR As stated previously, this ICR includes burden estimates for only the disinfection residual monitoring and associated activity components of the SWTR. The Microbial Rules ICR addresses the burden and costs for the other SWTR requirements. Implementation of the SWTR disinfection residual monitoring is expected to result in an annual State burden of 0.33 million hours. Included in this estimate is burden associated with reviewing data for

Distribution system residual monitoring.

Calculation of inactivation ratio using CT values.

Measurement of pH and temperature, as necessary to meet requirements.

Entry point residual monitoring for filtered systems.

Entry point residual monitoring for unfiltered systems. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 70 Estimates for primacy agency burden for the SWTR are based on State Workload Model assumptions carried forward from the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR and this ICR. Detailed calculations for burden and cost are shown in Appendix F.

7) Arsenic Rule For the 2001 Arsenic Rule, annual State burden is estimated to be 0.09 million hours. The annual State burden is based on assumptions contained in the 2000 Arsenic Rule ICR. Burden is calculated for primacy agency staff for monitoring activities only. Since the start up activities have been completed, no burden or cost is reported for these activities. Monitoring burden is derived based on recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance tracking and analysis. Section 6( f) describes the reasons for changes between the burden reported in the 2000 Arsenic Rule ICR and this ICR. Calculations for cost and burden for the 2000 Rule are included in Appendix G.

8) Lead and Copper Rule EPA estimates that the annual burden incurred by primacy agencies for activities associated with the lead and copper regulation is approximately 0.21 million hours. This estimate includes costs for employing a corrosion control expert and costs to review various letters and results submitted by water systems in accordance with the LCR. Further detail about these activities and associated burden and costs is provided in Appendix H.

6( b) Respondent Costs 6( b)( i) Cost to Public Water Systems Exhibit 7 shows the annual costs for PWSs over the three year ICR period. Annual costs are estimated at approximately $ 312.4 million, which consists of $ 187.8 million in O& M costs, $ 6.9 million in capital costs, and $ 117.7 million in labor costs.

Labor costs are based on the number of burden hours times the average hourly wage rate, including overhead. The average hourly wage rate is the rate quoted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) for Standard Occupational Classification ( SOC) Code 51 8031, " Local Government   Water and Liquid Waste Treatment Plant and System Operators." The quoted rate was $ 16.64 in 2002 dollars ( see http:// stats. bls. gov). For consistency, this rate has been inflated to 2003 dollars using the Employment Cost Index. The inflated rate is $ 17.09. In addition, 60 percent overhead was assumed, bringing the loaded rate to $ 27.34 in 2003 dollars.

In addition to labor costs, there are O& M costs associated with the each of the rules covered by this ICR. These O& M costs reflect non labor costs associated with sample analysis for Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 23 According to the ICR Handbook, an employee works an average of 2,080 hours in one year.

71 each of the rules. These costs vary by rule according to the frequency and cost of a particular analysis.

In addition to O& M costs, the requirements of one rule ( i. e., SWTR) result in capital costs to affected PWSs. Capital costs are incurred to buy and replace monitoring equipment necessary for on site analysis of disinfectant residuals and water pH. Capital costs are based on vendor estimates for both in line and portable equipment, as required by regulations. Equipment costs are based on a seven year replacement cycle. Details on both the capital and O& M costs associated with each rule can be found in Appendices B through H.

6( b)( ii) Cost to Primacy Agencies Exhibit 8 shows that the annual cost to primacy agencies is estimated at approximately $ 67.4 million, which is comprised almost exclusively of labor costs. There are some O& M costs associated with the Lead and Copper Rule ($ 0.005 million). The labor costs are based on an average full time equivalent ( FTE) cost of $ 66,008 including overhead, which equates to approximately $ 31.73 per hour. 23 This rate, which has been inflated to year 2003 dollars, is based on the rate ($ 55,000) suggested by the workgroup that developed the State Workload Model in 1997. There are no primacy agency capital costs associated with this ICR.

Exhibit 7 Annual PWS Burden and Cost 2005 2007 Activity Annual Burden Hours Cost Annual Responses Annual Labor Cost ($ K) Annual O& M Cost ($ K) Annual Capital Cost ($ K) Total Annual Cost ($ K)

Stage 1 DBPR 708,300 $ 19,366 $ 70,661 $ 0 $ 90,027 2,008,384 Chemical Phases ( including Nitrate/ Nitrite) 448,272 $ 12,256 $ 63,552 $ 0 $ 75,808 472,298 UCMR 1 38 $ 1 $ 0 $ 0 $ 1 26 Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 Activity Annual Burden Hours Cost Annual Responses Annual Labor Cost ($ K) Annual O& M Cost ($ K) Annual Capital Cost ($ K) Total Annual Cost ($ K)

72 1976 Radionuclides 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0 2000 Radionuclides 20,655 $ 565 $ 4,019 $ 0 $ 4,584 41,309 TTHM Rule 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0 SWTR ( disinfectant residuals and associated activities only) 1,221,709 $ 33,403 $ 37,004 $ 6,918 $ 77,325 13,360,307 Arsenic Rule 185,443 $ 5,070 $ 1,732 $ 0 $ 6,802 40,172 Lead and Copper Rule 1,719,892 $ 47,024 $ 10,877 $ 0 $ 57,901 679,104 TOTAL 4,304,309 $ 117,685 $ 187,845 $ 6,918 $ 312,448 16,601,600 Note: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 73 Exhibit 8 Annual Primacy Agency Burden and Cost 2005 2007 Activity Annual Burden Hours Cost Annual Responses Annual Labor Cost ($ K) Annual O& M Cost ($ K) Annual Capital Cost ($ K) Total Annual Cost ($ K)

Stage 1 DBPR 149,332 $ 4,739 $ 0 $ 0 $ 4,739 48,132 Chemical Phases ( including Nitrate/ Nitrite) 1,333,109 $ 42,306 $ 0 $ 0 $ 42,306 602,648 UCMR 1 2,432 $ 77 $ 0 $ 0 $ 77 228 1976 Radionuclides 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0 2000 Radionuclides 2,479 $ 79 $ 0 $ 0 $ 79 41,309 TTHM Rule 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 0 SWTR ( disinfectant residuals and associated activities only) 333,011 $ 10,568 $ 0 $ 0 $ 10,568 176,784 Arsenic Rule 89,158 $ 2,829 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,829 41,212 Lead and Copper Rule 213,218 $ 6,766 $ 5 $ 0 $ 6,771 58,683 TOTAL 2,122,739 $ 67,364 $ 5 $ 0 $ 67,369 968,996 Note: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 24 The EPA burden for activities where EPA acts as a primacy agent counts as primacy agency burden and is included in totals for primacy agency burden.

25 Source: SDWIS/ FED Data from the FY03Q04 frozen database extracted on December 31, 2003.

26 This is a simplifying assumption. Primacy activities for Wyoming and the District of Columbia are actually implemented by the respective EPA Regional offices.

74 6( c) Agency Burden and Costs Burden and costs to the Federal government are incurred by EPA's drinking water program in Headquarters and EPA Regions to assist States in implementing drinking water regulations. EPA burden and costs for on going general activities for all EPA drinking water regulations ( not just those listed in this ICR) are accounted for under the PWSS Program ICR. Burden and costs included in the PWSS Program ICR cover all cross cutting ( non rule specific) regulatory activities associated with compliance tracking, regulatory enforcement, and rule development activities. With the exception of the UCMR 1, there are no rule specific activities expected for EPA under any of the rules covered by this ICR. 24 EPA costs specific to the UCMR 1 are included in this ICR. Specifically, EPA will be paying O& M costs for small system sampling analysis and consultants for setup and evaluation of the UCMR 1 data monitoring protocol. These O& M costs are estimated to be $ 0.65 million annually. In addition, EPA is expected to incur an annual burden of 4,777 hours to oversee the UCMR 1 efforts at an annual labor cost of $ 0.3 million.

6( d) Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Respondents for this ICR include both PWSs and States or other primacy agencies. This ICR estimates that the number of PWS respondents is 161,217 existing PWSs. 25 However, all PWSs are not necessarily subject to each of the information collection requirements contained in this ICR. The regulations associated with each rule identify the numbers and types of PWSs that are subject to each particular provision. In addition to the PWS respondents, this ICR assumes 57 primacy agencies ( 50 States plus D. C., U. S. Territories, and the Navajo Nation). 26 Therefore, the total number of respondents is 161,274.

The total costs and burden for these respondents are summarized in Exhibits 7 and 8. EPA costs and burden are detailed in Section 6( c).

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs The bottom line burden hours and costs appear in Exhibit 9. The total annual respondent burden associated with this ICR is estimated to be approximately 6.43 million hours. The total Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 75 annual respondent costs are estimated to be $ 379.8 million. The total national burden, including respondent burden and EPA burden, is estimated to be 6.43 million hours annually. The total national cost, for respondents and EPA, is estimated to be $ 380.8 million annually. The approximate annual O& M and capital costs are $ 194.8 million ($ 187.8 million for O& M and $ 6.9 million for capital). This represents the " cost burden" as reported in the OMB inventory.

Exhibit 9 Bottom Line Annual Burden and Cost 2005 2007 Annual Number of Respondents 161,274 = 161,217 + 57 Existing PWSs Primacy agencies Total Annual Responses 17,570,596 = 16,601,600 + 968,996 PWS responses ( see Exhibit 7) Primacy agency responses ( see Exhibit 8)

Number of Responses per Respondent 109.0 = 17,570,596 / 161,274 Total annual responses from above Total annual respondents from above Total Annual Respondent Hours 6,427,048 = 4,304,309 + 2,122,739 PWS hours ( see Exhibit 7) Primacy agency hours ( see Exhibit 8)

Hours per Response 0.37 = 6,427,048 / 17,570,596 Total annual respondent hours from above Total annual responses from above Annual O& M and Capital Cost $ 194,768k = $ 187,845k +$ 6,918k + 5k Total PWS O& M costs Total PWS capital costs Total primacy agencies O& M costs Total Annual Respondent Cost $ 379,817k = $ 312,448k + $ 67,369k For PWSs ( see Exhibit 7) For primacy agencies ( see Exhibit 8)

Total Annual Hours ( resp. plus Agency) 6,431,825 = 6,427,048 + 4,777 Total annual respondent hours from above Total EPA hours Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 76 Total Annual Cost ( resp. plus Agency) $ 380,768k = $ 379,817k +$ 951k Total annual respondent cost from above Total EPA cost 6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden This section presents the change in burden and explains the reasons for the change in burden. The discussion is divided into two parts

Section 6( f)( i) summarizes the restructuring adjustments being made for the addition of the Arsenic Rule to the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. See Exhibit 11.

Section 6( f)( ii) summarizes other adjustments to the annual burden estimates associated with each rule in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. See Exhibits 12 through 14.

Exhibit 10 summarizes how each of these changes has affected the overall burden inventory for the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR.

Exhibit 10 Summary of Changes in Annual Burden ( Includes both PWS and Primacy Agency Burden)

Type of Change Burden ( hours) Running Total Comment Burden Estimated in the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR 6,117,936 6,117,936 This burden serves as the baseline for the 2004 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR.

Restructuring Adjustments   see Section 6( f)( i) 667,179 6,785,115 Burden for the Arsenic Rule is now included in this ICR.

Other Adjustments to Burden   see Section 6( f)( ii) ( 358,067) 6,427,048 Burden for which EPA seeks approval in this ICR.

6( f)( i) Restructuring Adjustments Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 77 Restructuring adjustments are being made to consolidate the burden for each of the regulations being newly incorporated into the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. These adjustments are discussed below and summarized in Exhibit 11.

Burden associated with the Arsenic Rule. The total annual respondent burden estimated in the Arsenic Rule ICR was approximately 0.667 million hours per year. The total annual respondent cost estimated in the Arsenic Rule ICR was approximately $ 12 million. The annual respondent burden included approximately 0.616 million annual hours for PWSs and 0.051 million annual hours for primacy agencies. The annual respondent cost included approximately $ 10.4 million for PWSs and $ 1.6 million for primacy agencies. There were no EPA costs or burden associated specifically with the Arsenic Rule. In order to consolidate DDBP/ Chem/ Rads rules, EPA is requesting that these hours be moved to the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR ( OMB No. 2040 0204).

Exhibit 11 Restructuring Adjustments to the Annual Burden Inventory for the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR ( Includes both PWS and Primacy Agency Burden)

Action Annual Burden Hours Brief Explanation N/ A 4,337,534 Inventory for the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR carried forward as the baseline 2004 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR Add 1 One hour was added for the Aeromonas monitoring under UCMR 1 when it was proposed.

Add 1,780,049 Inventory for the Lead and Copper Rule added as an amendment to the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR on 10/ 17/ 03.

Subtract 1 Adjustment to remove the proposed Aeromonas monitoring burden under UCMR 1.

Add 353 Inventory for final Aeromonas monitoring requirement added as an amendment to the UCMR 1, included in the DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR on 10/ 17/ 03.

Subtotal 6,117,936 Current opening inventory for the 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 78 Add 667,179 This represents the current Arsenic Rule burden inventory. This inventory is being moved from the Arsenic Rule ICR ( OMB 2040 0231) into the 2004 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR.

Total 6,785,115 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR inventory based on current burden inventories 6( f)( ii) Other Burden Adjustments Changes in calculated burden are a result of updating relevant baseline information for each rule with the most current and accurate information available ( e. g., PWS inventories). Where appropriate, estimated violation, waiver, and other associated rates have also been updated to reflect current information on rule compliance. Exhibits 12 and 13 summarize reasons for these changes and quantify the changes by rule. Burden adjustments associated with PWS activities resulted in a burden decrease of 0.40 million hours and are detailed in Exhibit 12. Burden adjustments for primacy agencies result in a increase of 0.04 million hours per year, as shown in Exhibit 13.

Exhibit 12 Adjustments to PWS Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Activity Previous Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) 2005 2007 Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) Change in Annual Burden ( hours) Reason for Change in Annual Burden Stage 1 DBPR 632,610 708,300 75,690 The increase in burden hours is attributable to monitoring activities in all three years included in this ICR under the Stage 1 DBPR. The previous ICR included monitoring for only one year.

Chemical Phases ( including Nitrate/ Nitrite) 456,785 448,272 ( 8,513) The decrease in PWS burden is attributable to a combination of updated system inventories, the requirements of the particular SMF compliance period, and the removal of the burden for arsenic which is now accounted for under the Arsenic Rule in this ICR. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 Activity Previous Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) 2005 2007 Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) Change in Annual Burden ( hours) Reason for Change in Annual Burden 79 UCMR 1* 6,890 38 ( 6,852) The decrease in annual burden is attributable to different UCMR 1 requirements for the period covered by this ICR. Most UCMR 1 activities have been completed. Only index systems require monitoring during this ICR period and only in 2005.

1976 Radionuclides 9,377 0 ( 9,377) Removal of burden is attributable to the regulation being completely superceded by the 2000 Rule beginning in 2004.

2000 Radionuclides 227,461 20,655 ( 206,806) The decrease in burden is attributable to the completion of the startup activities under the previous ICR. For monitoring activities that began in 2004 and continue into this ICR period, the burden is small relative to startup activities completed in the previous ICR.

TTHM Rule 20,190 0 ( 20,190) Removal of burden is attributable to commencement of Stage 1 DBPR monitoring activities, which supercede those under the TTHM Rule. Monitoring activities are accounted for under the Stage 1 DBPR beginning in 2002 for large surface water systems and 2004 for all other systems.

SWTR ( disinfectant residuals and associated activities only) 1,153,060 1,221,709 68,649 The increase in burden is attributable to the use of updated system inventories and entry points per system to calculate monitoring costs.

Arsenic Rule 615,928 185,443 ( 430,485) The large decrease in burden is attributable to the completion of start up activities. For monitoring activities that continue into this ICR period, the burden is small relative to the start up activities that were completed in the previous ICR.

Lead and Copper Rule 1,581,363 1,719,892 138,529 The increase in burden is attributable to the use of updated system inventories and different requirements during the particular monitoring period.

TOTAL 4,703,664 4,304,309 ( 399,355) Adjusted PWS Burden.

* Previous annual burden estimate includes 353 hours for the addition of Aeromonas monitoring. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 80 Exhibit 13 Adjustments to Primacy Agency Burden from Previous ICR Estimates Activity Previous Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) 2005 2007 Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) Change in Annual Burden ( hours) Reason for Change in Burden Stage 1 DBPR 168,686 149,332 ( 19,354) The decrease in burden hours is attributable to the completion of startup activities required under the Stage 1 DBPR. Primacy agency activities for startup under this rule required a relatively large annual burden in comparison to ongoing activities associated with reporting and recordkeeping.

Chemical Phases ( including Nitrate/ Nitrite ) 1,382,742 1,333,109 ( 49,633) Decrease in burden is due to the removal of burden for Arsenic ( now covered by the Arsenic Rule).

UCMR 1 8,925 2,432 ( 6,493) The decrease in annual burden is attributable to different UCMR 1 requirements for the period covered by this ICR. Only a small number of index systems are still required to monitor.

1976 Radionuclides 1,125 0 ( 1,125) Decrease in burden is attributable to the regulations being completely superceded by the 2000 Rule beginning in 2004.

2000 Radionuclides 8,076 2,479 ( 5,597) The decrease in burden is attributable to the completion of the startup activities considered under the previous ICR. For monitoring activities that begin in 2004 and continue into this ICR period, the burden is small relative to startup activities completed in the previous ICR.

TTHM Rule 7,571 0 ( 7,571) The decrease in burden is attributable to commencement of Stage 1 DBPR monitoring activities, which supercede those under the TTHM Rule. Monitoring activities fall under the Stage 1 DBPR beginning in 2002 for large surface water systems and 2004 for all other systems. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 Activity Previous Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) 2005 2007 Annual Burden Estimate ( hours) Change in Annual Burden ( hours) Reason for Change in Burden 81 SWTR ( disinfectant residuals and associated activities only) 254,389 333,011 78,622 Because total SWTR primacy agency burden is derived from the State Workload Model, a single burden value is given for the SWTR. Therefore, in order to estimate burden for SWTR activities covered under this ICR, burden hours were apportioned based on the relative proportion of burden hours for activities covered under this ICR and the Microbial Rules ICR.. The increase in burden listed here results from an increase in the number of burden hours accounted for in this ICR relative to those counted elsewhere ( hours for turbidity monitoring and associated activities are counted under the Microbial Rules ICR).

Arsenic Rule 51,251 89,158 37,907 The increase in burden is due to an increased number of waivers during this ICR period that the primacy agency is required to review and inclusion of burden hours previously counted under the Chemical Phases rules.

Lead and Copper Rule 198,686 213,218 14,532 The increase in burden is attributable to the use of updated system inventories and different requirements during the particular monitoring period.

TOTAL 2,081,451 2,122,739 41,288 Adjusted Primacy Agency Burden Exhibit 14 shows the affect of these adjustments on the bottom line burden. Subtracting 399,355 hours to account for the adjustment for the PWS burden and adding 41,288 hours to account for the downward adjustment for the primacy burden yields 6,427,048 hours. Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 82 Exhibit 14 Adjustments to Annual Burden Carried Forward from Previous ICR Estimates ( Includes both PWS and Primacy Agency Burden)

Action Annual Burden Hours Brief Explanation None 6,785,115 2001 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR inventory ( 6,117,936) and the 2001 Arsenic Rule ICR inventory ( 667,179) ( see Exhibit 11).

Subtract 399,355 Adjustment to the PWS burden carried forward from previous ICRs ( see Exhibit 12).

Add 41,288 Adjustment to the primacy agency burden carried forward from previous ICRs ( see Exhibit 13).

Total 6,427,048 Hours requested in 2004 DDBP/ Chem/ Rads Rules ICR ( see Exhibit 10).

6( g) Burden Statement The public reporting burden for collections included in this ICR is detailed in Exhibit 14 above. The annual respondent burden is estimated to average approximately 6.4 million hours, of which 4.3 million hours are attributable to PWSs and 2.1 million hours to primacy agencies. These estimates include time for gathering information as well as developing and maintaining records.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by people to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology, and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information collection unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of Disinfectants/ Disinfection Byproducts, Chemical, and Radionuclides Rules ICR September 2004 83 automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. OW 2004 0009, which is available for public viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is ( 202) 566 2426. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select " search," then key in the docket ID number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. ( OW 2004 0009) and the OMB Control No. ( 2040 0204) in any correspondence.

.


[Federal Register: March 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 44)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11843-11844]
[DOCID:fr05mr08-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

14 CFR Parts 234, 253, 259, and 399

[Docket No. DOT-OST-2007-0022]
RIN No. 2105-AD72

Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation
(DOT).

ACTION: Clarification Concerning Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(ANPRM).

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

SUMMARY: On November 20, 2007, the Department of Transportation (DOT or
Department) published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM),
72 FR 65233 seeking comments on whether the Department should adopt a
rule to enhance airline passenger protections in the following ways:
Require carriers to adopt contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays
and incorporate them in their contracts of carriage, require carriers
to respond to consumer problems, deem operating a chronically delayed
flight to be unfair and deceptive, require carriers to publish delay
data, require carriers to publish complaint data, require on-time
performance reporting for international flights, and require carriers
to audit their compliance with their customer service plans.
    In a section of the ANPRM entitled ``Regulatory Notices'' the
Department addressed a number of general regulatory issues as they
relate to the ANPRM, including DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures,
Federalism, the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Paperwork Reduction
Act. In its discussion of Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''), which
sets forth certain requirements for Federal agencies when they are
``taking action that preempts State law,'' the ANPRM concluded that it
``does not propose any regulation that * * * preempts State law.''
Based upon comments DOT has received, and upon its own further review,
the Department has determined that this statement has been misconstrued
in the overall context of the proposed DOT regulation and its impact
upon State law. This notice clarifies the Department's prior statement
concerning preemption in this area.

DATES: Comments on the ANPRM were due to be filed on or before January
22, 2008. The Department is currently reviewing comments that it has
received. The Department will further address this issue in any Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking subsequently issued by the Department in this
docket.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy L. Wolf or Blane A. Workie,
Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and
Proceedings, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave.,
SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>,<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax),
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(e-mail).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department's ANPRM sought comment on a
variety of DOT proposals, including:
    (1) Amending 14 CFR part 253 to require any certificated or
commuter air carrier that operates domestic scheduled passenger service
using any aircraft with more than 30 passenger seats to develop a
contingency plan for long ground delays on the tarmac for all of its
flights (including those that use aircraft with 30 or fewer seats) and
to incorporate this plan in its contract of carriage;
    (2) Adopting a new regulation, 14 CFR Part 259, that among other
things would require every certificated and commuter carrier that
operates domestic scheduled passenger service using any aircraft with
more than 30 passenger seats to respond to mounting consumer problems
in a number of specific ways;
    (3) Amending 14 CFR 399.81 so that it sets forth the Department's
enforcement posture on chronically delayed flights;
    (4) Amending 14 CFR 234.11 to require airlines that report on-time
performance to the Department pursuant to 14 CFR part 234 (i.e.,
certificated U.S. carriers that account for at least 1% of the domestic
scheduled passenger revenue) and online reservation services to include
on their Web sites, at a point before the passenger selects a flight
for purchase, specific information for each listed flight about its
performance during the previous month;
    (5) Adopting a new regulation, 14 CFR Part 259, that would also
require certificated and commuter carriers that operate domestic
scheduled passenger service using any aircraft with more than 30
passenger seats to publish complaint data on their Web sites;
    (6) Amending 14 CFR 234.4 and 234.11 to require carriers that
report on-time performance to the Department pursuant to 14 CFR Part
234 (i.e., certificated U.S. carriers that account for at least 1% of
the domestic scheduled passenger revenue) and the largest foreign
carriers to report on-time performance for international flights to and
from the United States; and
    (7) Adopting a new regulation that would require certificated and
commuter carriers that operate domestic scheduled passenger service
using any aircraft with more than 30 passenger seats to audit their
adherence to their own customer service plans.
    Detailed discussions concerning each of these proposals are set
forth in the November 20, 2007 ANPRM.
    In the ``Regulatory Notices'' section of the ANPRM the Department
addressed a number of regulatory issues. Matters relating to Executive
Order 13132 were addressed as follows:

    This Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive
Order 13132 (``Federalism''). This notice does not propose any
regulation that (1) has substantial direct effects on the States,
the relationship between the national government and the States, or
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, (2) imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on State and local governments, or (3) preempts State law.
Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive
Order 13132 do not apply.

72 FR 65236 (emphasis supplied). After further review, including
initial review of comments submitted to the Department in response to
the ANPRM, the Department has concluded that our prior statement
addressing preemption of State regulations concerning air carrier
operations has been misconstrued.
    Executive Order 13132 sets forth certain requirements for Federal
agencies when they are ``taking action that preempts State law.''
Promulgation of a Final Rule incorporating the Department's proposals
on enhancing airline passenger protections as set forth in the ANPRM,
or other proposals addressing the matters giving rise to the ANPRM,
would not ``tak[e] action that preempts State law'' because such State
or local laws are already preempted under the Airline Deregulation Act
(ADA), which provides at 49 U.S.C. 41713(b)(4)(A), that ``a State,
political subdivision of a State, or political authority of 2 or more
States may not enact or enforce a law, regulation, or other provision
having the force and effect of law related to a price, route, or
service of an air carrier.'' The Supreme Court has consistently
interpreted the ADA broadly so as to preclude any regulation of airline
services other than by the Federal government. See Morales

v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374, 378 (1992); American
Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 5113 U.S. 219 (1995). This broad view has
most recently been re-affirmed in Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport
Assoc., --S. Ct. --, 2008 WL 440686, U.S., February 20, 2008 (No. 06-
457).
    For the foregoing reason, any State or local rules addressing, or
related to, the services offered by air carriers are already preempted
under the ADA. In addition, if the proposed rule addressed in the ANPRM
is finalized, it is likely that the final rule would also separately
preempt any such State or local regulations under other provisions of
law. We need not further address any other grounds for preemption,
particularly at the ANPRM stage, since, as explained above, States and
localities are already precluded from regulating in this area.

    Issued this 3rd day of March, 2008, at Washington, DC.
Michael W. Reynolds,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 08-969 Filed 3-3-08; 11:13 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


P-17-0298 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-17-0298 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-17-0298 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-17-0298 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-17-0298 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-17-0298 Non-CBI EXP Report (attached)
 P-17-0298 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-17-0298 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21542-21543]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09380]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0675; FRL-9960-84]

TSCA Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Standards for
Small Manufacturers and Processors; Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On December 15, 2016, EPA issued a notice in the Federal
Register requesting public comment on whether revision to the current
size standards for small manufacturers and processors, which are used
in connection with reporting regulations under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a), is warranted. This document reopens
the comment period for 15

days. The comment period is being reopened in order to allow the public
to consider feedback received by EPA from the Small Business
Administration (SBA) as a result of a consultation request on EPA's
preliminary determination on whether revision to these standards is
warranted.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2016-0675, must be received on or before May 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in
the Federal Register document of December 15, 2016 (81 FR 90840) (FRL-
9956-03).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Lynne Blake-Hedges, Chemistry,
Economics, and Sustainable Strategies Division (7406M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-8807; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document reopens the public comment
period established in the Federal Register document of December 15,
2016. In that document, EPA requested comment on its preliminary
determination on whether a revision of the standards for determining
the manufacturers and processors which qualify as small manufacturers
and processors for purposes of TSCA sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) was
warranted. On December 7, 2016, EPA also submitted a consultation
request to the SBA on the adequacy of the current standards and
requested a response within 15 business days of receipt (Ref. 1). EPA
had intended to add SBA's response to the docket to give the public an
opportunity to review the response to inform their comments on EPA's
preliminary determination. EPA received feedback on the consultation
request on behalf of the SBA Administrator on April 5, 2017 (Ref. 2),
concluding the consultation with SBA. Consistent with section
8(a)(3)(C), EPA is providing public notice and an opportunity for
comment on its preliminary determination after consultation with the
Administrator of SBA.
    EPA is hereby reopening the comment period for 15 days to May 24,
2017.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions provided under ADDRESSES in the Federal Register
document of December 15, 2016 (81 FR 90840) (FRL-9956-03). If you have
questions, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

References

    The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and
other information considered by EPA, including documents that are
referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even
if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

1. Jones, Jim. Letter to Maria Contreras-Sweet. ``Consultation under
Section 8(a)(3)(C) the Toxic Substances Control Act''. December
2016.
2. Linda McMahon. Response to Consultation Request under Section
8(a)(3)(C) the Toxic Substances Control Act. April 2017.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(3)(C).

    Dated: April 21, 2017.
Wendy Cleland-Hamnett,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2017-09380 Filed 5-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 244 (Thursday, December 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 65352]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27608]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9987-90-OA]

Meetings of the Local Government Advisory Committee and the Small
Communities Advisory Subcommittee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) will meet in
Washington, DC, on Thursday, January 10, 2019, 9:30 a.m.-5:35 p.m.
(EDT), and Friday, January 11, 2019, 10:00 a.m.-12:30 p.m. (EDT). The
focus of the Committee meeting will be on issues pertaining to water
and water infrastructure; emerging contaminants; superfund and
brownfields; risk communication and other issues in EPA's Strategic
Plan. The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS) will meet in
Washington, DC, on Friday, January 11, 2019, 8:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m. (EDT).
The Subcommittee will discuss water infrastructure, community
revitalization, agricultural issues, and other issues and
recommendations to the Administrator regarding environmental issues
affecting small communities.
    These are open meetings, and all interested persons are invited to
participate. The LGAC will hear comments from the public between and
11:20 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. on Thursday, January 10, 2019. The SCAS will
hear comments from the public between 8:40 a.m. and 8:50 a.m. on
Friday, January 11, 2019. Individuals or organizations wishing to
address the Subcommittee or the Committee will be allowed a maximum of
five minutes to present their point of view. Also, written comments may
be submitted electronically to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for the LGAC and
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for the SCAS. Please contact the
Designated Federal Officers (DFO) at the numbers listed below to
schedule a time on the agenda. Time will be allotted on a first-come
first-serve basis, and the total period for comments may be extended if
the number of requests for appearances requires it.

ADDRESSES: The Local Government Advisory Committee meetings will be
held at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Conference Room 1153,
William Jefferson Clinton EPA East Building, 1201 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20460. The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee
meeting will be held at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Conference Room 1153, William Jefferson Clinton EPA East Building, 1201
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. Meeting summaries will be
available after the meeting online at www.epa.gov/ocir/scas_lgac/lgac_index.htm and can be obtained by written request to the DFO. In
the event of cancellation for unforeseen circumstances, please contact
the the designated federal officer(s) for reschedule information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Local Government Advisory Committee
(LGAC) contact Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer, at (202)
564-3115 or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and Small Communities
Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS), contact Cristina Mercurio, Designated
Federal Officer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Information on Services for those with Disabilities: For
information on access or services for individuals with disabilities,
please contact Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>. To request accommodation of a disability,
please request it 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much
time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: December 3, 2018.
Jack Bowles,
Director, State and Local Relations, EPA's Office of Congressional and
Intergovernmental Relations.
[FR Doc. 2018-27608 Filed 12-19-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11280-11281]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03965]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0868; Product Identifier 2019-NM-152-AD; Amendment
39-19843; AD 2020-03-19]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and
20-F5 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. This AD
requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 2, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of April 2,
2020.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box
2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet
https://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0868.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0868; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
EASA AD 2019-0200R1, dated August 29, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0200R1'')
(also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and
20-F5 airplanes, except those on which the Supplemental Structural
Inspection Program (SSIP) (Dassault Service Bulletin 730) has been
embodied into the airplane's maintenance program. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0868.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Dassault
Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and 20-F5 airplanes.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2019 (84 FR
63585). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The NPRM proposed
to require revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations. The FAA is issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking,
damage, and corrosion in principal structural elements, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. See the MCAI
for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Dassault Aviation has issued Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness
Limitations, of the Dassault Falcon 20 Retrofit 731 Maintenance Manual,
Revision 13, dated January 1, 2019. This service information describes
procedures for airworthiness limitations for safe life limits and
certification maintenance requirements. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 56 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD.
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 workhours per operator,
although the FAA recognizes that this number may vary from operator to
operator. In the past, the FAA has estimated that this action takes 1
work-hour per airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or
inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has
determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-
airplane estimate. Therefore, the FAA estimates the total cost per
operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds

necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that
is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking
action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2020-03-19 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-19843; Docket No. FAA-
2019-0868; Product Identifier 2019-NM-152-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective April 2, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR 79952,
December 21, 2010) (``AD 2010-26-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5,
20-D5, 20-E5, and 20-F5 airplanes, certificated in any category,
except those on which the Supplemental Structural Inspection Program
(SSIP) (Dassault Service Bulletin 730) has been embodied into the
airplane's existing maintenance or inspection program.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion
in principal structural elements, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate the information specified in Chapter 5-40-00,
Airworthiness Limitations, of the Dassault Falcon 20 Retrofit 731
Maintenance Manual, Revision 13, dated January 1, 2019. The initial
compliance time for doing the tasks is at the time specified in
Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Dassault Falcon
20 Retrofit 731 Maintenance Manual, Revision 13, dated January 1,
2019, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the
actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.

(i) Terminating Action for Certain Requirements of AD 2010-26-05

    Accomplishing the actions required by this AD terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-26-05 only for Model
MYSTERE-FALCON 20-C5, 20-D5, 20-E5, and 20-F5 airplanes on which the
SSIP has not been embodied into the airplane's existing maintenance
or inspection program.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2019-0200R1, dated August 29, 2019, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2019-0868.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, of the Dassault
Falcon 20 Retrofit 731 Maintenance Manual, Revision 13, dated
January 1, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on February 12, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-03965 Filed 2-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47071-47072]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21718]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Seventy First RTCA SC-135 Environmental Testing Plenary

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Seventy First RTCA SC-135 Environmental Testing Plenary.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of Seventy First RTCA SC-135 Environmental Testing Plenary.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 26-27, 2017 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at: National Institute for Aviation
Research, 4000 E. 17th St. N., Wichita, KS 67208. Registration is
require for this plenary.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Morrison at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite
910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at
(202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Seventy First RTCA SC-135
Environmental Testing Plenary. The agenda will include the following:

October 26-27, 2017--9:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m.

    1. Chairmen's Opening Remarks, Introductions.
    2. Approval of Summary From the Sixty-Ninth Meeting--(RTCA Paper
No. XX-17/SC135-XXX).
    3. Approval of Summary From the Seventieth Meeting--(RTCA Paper No.
XX-17/SC135-XXX).
    4. Review Working Group Summaries.
    5. Review Ground Based Task Group Summary.
    6. Review Schedule.
    7. New/Unfinished Business.
    8. Establish Date for Next SC-135 Meeting.
    9. Closing.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. Registration is required to attend this event. With the
approval of the chairman, members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or
obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a
written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 4, 2017.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17,
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017-21718 Filed 10-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P