SF-83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

	1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E) (Renewal)

	1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), for the regulations published at 40 CFR part 61, subpart E were proposed on December 7, 1971, promulgated on April 6, 1973, and amended on October 14, 1975, March 19, 1987 and October 17, 2000.  These standards apply to the stationary sources which process mercury ore to recover mercury, use mercury chlor-alkali cells to produce chlorine gas and alkali metal hydroxide, and incinerate or dry wastewater treatment plant sludge.

	In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities.  They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.  Semiannual summary reports are also required.

	Any owner/operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.  In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

	Based on our consultations with industry representatives, there is an average of one affected facility at each plant site and that each plant site has only one respondent (i.e., the owner/operator of the plant site).

	There are 107 respondents (one hundred wastewater treatment plant sludge incineration and drying plants and seven cell chlor-alkali plants), that will be subject to the regulation over the period covered by this ICR, and it is estimated that no additional respondents will become subject to the regulation in the next three years.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the current Information Collection Request (ICR) without any “Terms of Clearance.”

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

	2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants.  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, HAP emissions from facilities in semiconductor manufacturing cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for the source category at 40 CFR part 61, subpart E.

	2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure compliance with the applicable regulations which were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard.  Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the standard at all times.  During the performance test, a record of the operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission monitor.

	The notifications required in the standard are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the standards are being met.  The performance test may also be observed.

	The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify operation/maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

	The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 61, subpart E.

	3(a)  Nonduplication

	If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication exists.

	3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

	An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 55368) on September 20, 2005.  No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

	3(c)  Consultations

	We were unable to get in contact with the Trade Associations.  After repeated calls to the associations they did not return any of our calls.

	We also referenced the most recent ICR, consulted with the preparer of the active ICR, and used other resources to obtain the most recent data available.  We reviewed information available from the United States Census Bureau, the Air Facility System (AFS), which is the primary source of information regarding the number of existing sources, and websites covering mercury.  We also consulted with EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Information Transfer and Program Integration Division.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.  Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and that emission limitations are met.  If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

	3(e)  General Guidelines

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

	3(f)  Confidentiality

	Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B - Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

	3(g)  Sensitive Questions

	The reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard do no include sensitive questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

	4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mercury facilities that process mercury ore to recover mercury, use mercury chlor-alkali cells to produce chlorine gas and alkali metal hydroxide, and incinerate or dry wastewater treatment plant sludge. The United States Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for the respondents affected by the standard are 2819 and 4952, which corresponds to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes 325188 and 22132 for mercury.

	4(b)  Information Requested

	None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

		(i)  Data Items

In this ICR, all the data that is recorded is required by NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E).

	A source must make the following reports:

Notifications	Standard Citation by Sections

Notification and application of construction or modification	61.06 and 61.07

Notification of anticipated date of initial startup	61.09(a)(1)

Notification of actual startup	61.09(a)(2)

Notification of physical or operational change which may increase the emission rate	61.15

Notification of performance tests	61.13(f)and (c)

Notification of annual stack emission tests	61.53(a)(1), (a)(3), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), (c)(2), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(4), 61.12, 61.55(b)(1), and (b)(2)

Performance of sludge test and determine mercury emissions	61.54(a), (c)-(e)

Certify monitoring device	61.55(b)(5)

Notification of stack emission test	61.53(a)(2). (b)(2), (c)(3), and (d)(3)

Semiannual reports of parameter excursions	61.55(b)(7)-(8)

Optional submission of a plant-specific monitoring, recordkeeping, and recording plan	61.55(c)

Notification of any parameter excursion that persists for 24 consecutive hours or longer (administrator must be notified within 10 days)  61.55(b)(6)(i-ii)

Sludge Sampling	61.54

Report of stack test, emission test results and sludge sampling data 61.53(a)(3-4), (b)(3-4), (d)(4-5), and 61.54(e-f)

	A source must make the following reports:

Recordkeeping for 40 CFR part 61, subpart E

Maintain record of emission test results and sludge sampling data for a minimum of two years 	61.53(a)(5), (b)(5), (d)(6), and 61.54(g)

Maintain records of monitoring data, monitoring system calibration checks, and the occurrence and duration of periods where the monitoring system is malfunctioning or inoperative.  Records shall be retained for at least two years.	61.14(f)

Maintain records for two years	61.55(d)(2)

Monitor and record appropriate process or control device parameters once each hour	61.55(b)(4)

Maintain daily records of all leaks or spills of mercury	 61.55(d)(1)

Electronic Reporting

	At the present, respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at the plant site.

	Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents continue to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the responses are done electronically.

		(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Perform initial performance test, using Method 101 Appendix B for mercury ore processing facilities, Method 102 for mercury chlor-alkali plants with hydrogen streams, Method 101 Appendix B for mercury chlor-alkali plants with cell room ventilation systems and Method 101A in Appendix B for sludge incineration and drying plants, or the alternative test Method 105 of Appendix B, and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

	Currently, sources are using automated monitoring equipment that provides parameter data.  Although personnel at the sources still need to evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.

5.  The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

	5(a)  Agency Activities

	EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

	5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

	Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs.  The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.

	Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data.

	The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/operator for two years.

	5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

	A majority of the respondents are large entities (i.e., large businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation.  Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities.  The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities.  To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced.

	5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden for NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61,

subpart E).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

	Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to this information collection are mandatory.  The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

	6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

	The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 20,490 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of this regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

	6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

		(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

	This ICR uses the following labor rates:

		Managerial	$100.99 ($48.09 + 110%)

		Technical	$87.97   ($41.89 + 110%)

		Clerical	$43.81   ($20.86 + 110%)

	These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

		(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

	The only type of industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the regulations is labor costs.  There are no capital/startup or operation and maintenance costs.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the reported information.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emission, and the publication and distribution of collected information.

	The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $29,706.  This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

		Managerial	$57.20   (GS-13, Step 5, $35.75 x 1.6)

		Technical	$42.45   (GS-12, Step 1, $26.53 x 1.6)

		Clerical	$22.96   (GS-6, Step 3, $14.35 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2006 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden, NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E).

	6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

	Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three years, approximately 107 existing respondents will be subject to the standard.  It is estimated that no additional respondent per year will become subject.  The overall average number of respondents, as shown in the table below is 107 per year.

	The number of respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

	Respondents That Submit Reports	Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

	Year	(A)

Number of New Respondents	(B)

Number of Existing Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents	(E)

Number of Respondents(E=A+B+C-D)

1	0	107	0	0	107

2	0	107	0	0	107

3	0	107	0	0	107

Average	0	107	0	0	107

	To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of this ICR is 107.  This number appears on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(a), Number of respondents.

	The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity	(B)

Number of Respondents	(C)

Number of Responses	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports	(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(BxC)+D

Notification of construction/reconstruction	0	1	0	0

Notification of initial startup	0	1	0	0

Notification of actual startup	0	1	0	0

Notification of initial performance test	0	1	0	0

Report of annual emission test	100	1	0	100

Submit semiannual report	7	2	0	14

Notification of parameter excursions	7	2	0	14

	Total	128

	The number of Total Annual Responses is 128.  This number is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(b), Total annual responses.

	6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden and Cost Tables

	The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, and summarized below.

		(i) Respondent Tally

The Total Hours Requested is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 13(c).  The total annual labor costs are $ 1,735,420.55.  The annual labor costs are not shown on the OMB 83-I form.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E).  Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 160 hours per response.

	The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $0.  This number is shown on the OMB 83-I form in block 14(c), Total annualized cost requested.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

		(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over the next three years is estimated to be 718 labor hours at a cost of $29,706.  See Table 2. Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR part 61, subpart E).

	6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

	The increase in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to an adjustment.  The reason for the change in burden is related to the fact that we are presently accounting for technical, managerial and clerical burdens in this renewal package.  The previous version of the ICR omitted the managerial and clerical burdens and used only technical. There was also a change in the labor rate which contributed to the increase in cost.

	There are no changes in the capital/startup and operations and maintenance (O&M) costs from the previous ICR.

	6(g)  Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 160 hours per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or 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 collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed at 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 automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0071, which is available for online viewing at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov , or in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.  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 Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version of the public docket is at http://www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When 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, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0071 and OMB Control Number 2060-0097 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

	This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost – NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart E)

Burden item

(A)

Person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No.  of

occurrences

per respondent

per year

(C)

Person-

hours per

respondent

per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents

per year  a

(E)

Technical

person-

hours per

year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $  b

1.  Applications	N/A

	2.  Survey and Studies	N/A

	3.  Reporting Requirements

    New Sources

   A. Read instructions c	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	$0

   B. Required activities

          Initial performance test d	24	1	24	0	0	0	0	$0

          Repeat performance test e	24	0.20	4.8	0	0	0	0	$0

   C. Create information	Included in 3B

	   D. Gather existing information	Included in 3B

	   E. Write reports

   New Sources

         Notification of construction/                          reconstruction f	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

         Notification of initial startup g	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

         Notification of actual startup g	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

         Report of initial performance test	Included in 3B

	         Notification of initial performance test	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	$0

   Existing Sources

         Report of annual emission test h	12	1	12	100	1,200	60	120 $116,880.60

         Submit semiannual report i	8	2	16	7	112	5.6	11.2	$10,908.85

         Notification of parameter excursions j	4	2	8	7	56	2.8	5.6 $5,454.43

4.  Recordkeeping requirements

   A. Read instructions 	Included in 3A

	   B. Plan activities	Included in 3B

	   C. Implement activities 	Included in 3B

	   D. Develop Record System

         Record operating parameters k	0.25	365	91.25	107	9,763.75 488.19	976.37	$950,994.16

         Record mercury leaks l	0.25	365	91.25	7	638.75	31.94	63.87 $62,214.60

         Record monitored parameters l	0.5	365	182.5	7	1,277.5	63.87 127.75	$124,428.63

         Compile data for semiannual reports m 	8	2	16	7	112	5.6	11.2 $10,908.85

         Maintain data on mercury leaks n	0.5	52	26	7	182	9.1	18.2 $17,726.89

         Maintain data on monitored                           parameters n	0.5	52	26	7	182	9.1	18.2	$17,726.89

   E. Time to enter information

         Records of startup, shutdown, and                malfunction o 1.5	53.5	80.25	53.5	4,293.37	214.67	429.34	$418,176.65

   F. Audits	N/A

	Subtotals Labor Burden and cost

	17,817.37	890.87	1,781.73	$1,735,420.55

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

	20,490	$1,797,635

Assumptions:

a  We have assumed that the average number of respondent that will be subject to the rule will be 107.  There will be no additional new source that will become subject to the rule over the three-year period of this ICR.

b  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $100.99 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $87.97 per hour for Technical labor, and $43.81 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational

and industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

c  It will take each new respondent 1 hour to read instructions.

d We have assumed that it will take 24 hours for each new respondent to complete the initial performance test.

e  We have assumed that 20 percent of new respondents will repeat the performance test due to failure.

f  We have assumed that each new respondent will take two hours to write notification report on construction/reconstruction.

g  We have assumed that it will take each new respondent two hours each to write notification reports on initial startup and actual startup.

h  We have assumed that 100 of the existing respondents will take 12 hours to write report on the annual emission tests.

i  It is assumed that seven of the existing respondents will each have to submit semiannual reports.

j  It is assumed that seven of the existing respondents will write notification report on parameter excursions twice a year.

k  We have assumed that all respondents will record operating parameters 365 days per year.

l  We have assumed that seven respondents will each have to record mercury leaks and monitored parameters.

m  We have assumed that seven respondents will each take eight hours to compile data for semiannual reports.

n  We have assumed that each of the seven respondent will have to maintain data on mercury leaks and monitored parameters 52 time per-year.

o  We have assumed that 50 percent of the respondents will each take 1.5 hours to record information of startup, shutdown, and malfunctions.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden - NESHAP for Mercury (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart E)

	Activity

(A)

EPA person-

hours per

occurrence

(B)

No. of

occurrences

per plant

 per year

(C)

EPA person

hours per

plant  per year

(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants per year  a

(E)

Technical

person-hours

per year

(E=CxD)

(F)

Management

person-hours

per year

(Ex0.05)

(G)

Clerical

person-

hours per year

(Ex0.1)

(H)

Cost, $ b

Required activities

   New Plants

        Initial performance tests c	24	1	24	0	0	0	0	$0

        Repeat performance tests c, d	24	0.2	4.8	0	0	0	0	$0

Report Review

   New Plants

        Notification of construction e	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of initial startup e	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of actual startup e	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	0	0	$0

        Notification of initial test e	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	0	0	$0

        Review test results f	8	1	8	0	0	0	0	$0

        Participate in performance test g	24	1	24	0	0	0	0	$0

   Existing Plants

        Annual emission test	4	1	4	100	400	20	40	$19,042.40

        Review semiannual reports h	8	2	16	7	112	5.6	11.2	$5,331.87

        Review notification on monitored               parameters i	8	2 16	7	112	5.6	11.2	$5,331.87

Subtotals Labor Burden and cost

	624	31.2	62.4	$29,706.14

 TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND     COST (rounded)

	718	$29,706

Assumptions:

    a  We have assumed that the average number of respondents that will be subject to the rule will be 107.  There will be no additional new source that will become subject to              the rule over the three-year period of this ICR.

b  This cost is based on the following labor rates which incorporates a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses:  Managerial rate of $57.20 (GS-13, Step 5, $35.75 x 1.6), Technical rate of $42.45 (GS-12, Step 1, $26.53 x 1.6), and Clerical rate of $22.96 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.35 x 1.6).  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2006 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.

c  We have assumed that it will take each respondent 24 hours to participate in the performance tests.

    d  We have assumed that 20 percent of new respondent will have to repeat performance tests due to failure.

    e  We have assumed that it will take each new respondent 0.5 hours to review notification reports.

    f  It will take each respondent 8 hours to review test results.

   g  It will take 24 hours for each respondent to participate in the performance test.

   h It is assumed that seven existing respondent will take eight hours twice a year to review semiannual reports.

  i  We have assumed that seven respondent will take eight hour each to review notification of monitored parameters.

 PAGE   16

 PAGE   17


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 7, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2003-16404

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  POLYNESIAN LIMITED
                              Date Filed:  October 24, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) to permit
the applicant to continue to conduct scheduled, combination services
between Pago Pago, American Samoa, and Ofu, American Samoa, and between
Pago Pago and Ta'u, American Samoa, beyond November 8, 2003, through
January 31, 2004, using 19-seat Twin Otter aircraft.  Polynesian
asserted that currently there is no scheduled, inter-island service
being provided by any U.S. carrier, that the need for its American Samoa
services (initially granted by the Department in Docket OST-2003-16163)
remains, and that it is prepared to continue (under its arrangement with
the Government of American Samoa) to provide several flights per week in
the affected markets, and, to the extent possible, add flights during
peak demand periods and for medical emergencies.

Applicant representative:  Charles F. Donley II,<PHONE_NUMBER>        DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  Polynesian Limited served its application on
those U.S. carriers having the potential to conduct these intra-American
Samoa services.  After polling these carriers, the applicant advised us
that, with the exception of Vision Air, no carrier would file comments
indicating that it had aircraft available to conduct the proposed
operations nor otherwise opposed grant of the requested authority.  On
November 7, Vision Air filed a pleading in which it stated its belief
that the severity of the emergency resulting from Samoa Aviation’s
cessation of service would shortly be alleviated by Vision Air’s
introduction of on-demand air taxi service.  It then went on to state
that nothing in its response “should be construed as a consent to the
extension of the requested emergency exemption beyond January 31,
2004.”

Statutory Standards:  Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize
a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points
(i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances.  Specifically, we
must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that
because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in
the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S.
carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all
possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers;
and that the transportation is necessary to avoid unreasonable hardship
to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning
emergency transportation during labor disputes, was not relevant here).

        DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved in part, remainder deferred (see below).
                   Action date:  November 7, 2003

Basis for approval:  We initially granted Polynesian Limited authority
to serve American Samoa for a 30-day period on September 23, 2003, in
Docket OST 2003-16163, and, on October 23, 2003, extended the
carrier’s exemption through November 8, 2003.  We now are granting
Polynesian Limited’s request in Docket OST 2003-16404 to continue to
operate its intra-American Samoa services, using its 19-seat Twin Otter
aircraft, for a period of 30 days (that is, through December 8, 2003),
and are deferring action on the remaining portion of Polynesian’s
application in this Docket, i.e., to continue this operation through
January 31, 2004.

In acting favorably on this unopposed request for extension of emergency
cabotage authority, we find that Polynesian Limited’s instant request
continues to meet all the relevant criteria of 49 U.S.C. section
40109(g) for the continued grant of an exemption of this type and that
such favorable action still is required in the public interest.  In
making our initial grant in this matter, on September 23, 2003, we noted
that the severe cutbacks in service in the inter-island American Samoa
markets by Samoa Aviation, the only U.S. carrier that had been serving
the subject markets, clearly

constituted an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in
the normal course of business; that no U.S. appeared able to provide the
level of service necessary to meet the needs of American Samoa, and that
the authority was necessary to prevent undue hardship to the residents
of American Samoa.  Based on the record before us, we find that those
determinations remain valid and again warrant extension of this
authority, this time through December 8, 2003.

Finally, we find that the applicant is qualified to perform its proposed
operation.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to our
standard exemption conditions.

Action taken by:      Michael W. Reynolds

                                  Acting Assistant Secretary for

                                     Aviation and International Affairs

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register: April 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 19491]
[DOCID:fr18ap07-49]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[OH-166-1; FRL-8301-6]

Adequacy Status of the Youngstown, OH, Submitted 8-Hour Ozone
Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for Transportation Conformity
Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found
that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in the
Youngstown, Ohio area (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties) are
adequate for use in transportation conformity determinations. Ohio
submitted these budgets with an 8-hour ozone redesignation request and
maintenance plan on December 4, 2006, and February 20, 2007. As a
result of our finding, Youngstown, Ohio must use the MVEBs from the
submitted 8-hour ozone redesignation and maintenance plan for future
conformity determinations.

DATES: This finding is effective May 3, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist,
Criteria Pollutant Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)
353-8777<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we'',
``us'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Background

    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have
already made. On March 21, 2007, EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency stating that the 2009 and 2018 MVEBs
for the Youngstown area, which were submitted with the 8-hour ozone
redesignation request and maintenance plan, are adequate. Receipt of
these MVEBs was announced on EPA's conformity Web site, and no comments
were submitted. The finding is available at EPA's conformity Web site:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

    The adequate 2009 and 2018 MVEBs, in tons per day (tpd), for VOC
and NOX for Youngstown are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 2005 MVEB    2018 MVEB
                                                   (tpd)        (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................................        19.58        10.36
NOX...........................................        33.71        13.29
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Dated: April 5, 2007.
Walter W. Kovalick,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E7-7367 Filed 4-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69014-69015]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25026]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC23-25-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Rock Falls Wind
Farm LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Rock Falls Wind Farm LLC et al.
    Filed Date: 11/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221109-5144.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following Complaints
and Compliance filings in EL Dockets:

    Docket Numbers: EL23-8-000.
    Applicants: Cubit Power One, Inc. v. Consolidated Edison Company of
New York, Inc.
    Description: Complaint of Cubit Power One, Inc. v. Consolidated
Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Filed Date: 11/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221109-5110.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/22.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER21-2329-003.
    Applicants: Minonk Stewardship Wind LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing for FERC Order in
Docket ER21-2329 to be effective 9/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-40-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Otter
Tail Power Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Midcontinent Independent System
Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.17(b): 2022-11-10_SA 3913
OTP-NSP Substitute FCA (Forman-Canby-Fergus MPFP) to be effective 12/7/
2022.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-402-000.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Committee.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Nov 2022 Membership Filing
II to be effective 11/10/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221109-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-403-000.
    Applicants: Grain Belt Express LLC.
    Description: Request for Prospective Tariff Waiver, et al. of Grain
Belt Express LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221109-5134.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/23/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-404-000.
    Applicants: Shullsburg Wind Farm LLC, Grant County Solar, LLC, Red
Barn Energy, LLC.
    Description: Request for One-Time Limited Waiver of Shullsburg Wind
Farm LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 11/9/22.
    Accession Number: 20221109-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/30/22.
    Docket Numbers: ER23-405-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc. & New England Power Pool.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits Installed Capacity
Requirement, Hydro Quebec Interconnection Capability Credits and
Related Values for the 17 FCA Associated with the 2026/2027 Capacity
Commitment Period.
    Filed Date: 11/8/22.
    Accession Number: 20221108-5168.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/29/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-406-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Service Company, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FirstEnergy Service Company
submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: FirstEnergy Service Co.
submits SA No. 6622 Construction Agreement to be effective 1/10/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5087.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-407-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Generator Replacement
Coordinator Agreement to be effective 1/10/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5109.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-408-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: OATT Existing Generator
Replacement Procedures to be effective 1/10/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-409-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Cost-Based Rate Tariff
Filing to be effective 6/17/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-410-000.
    Applicants: Sandy Ridge Wind, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Co-Tenancy and Shared
Facilities Agreement with Waivers to be effective 11/11/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5128.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-411-000.
    Applicants: Sandy Ridge Wind 2, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Certificate of Concurrence
and Request for Waiver and Blanket Approval to be effective 11/11/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5132.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-412-000.
    Applicants: National Grid Generation LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: A&R PSA Amendment No. 4 to
be effective 2/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-413-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2022-11-10_Generation
Stability Limits

and other limitations to be effective 1/10/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5141.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-414-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to Service
Agreement FERC No. 808 to be effective 10/24/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/10/22.
    Accession Number: 20221110-5172.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 12/1/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 10, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25026 Filed 11-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 87)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21295-21300]
[DOCID:fr07my09-22]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2008-0812; FRL-8902-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio; Volatile
Organic Compound Emission Control Measures for Cleveland

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On March 23, 2009, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio EPA) submitted several volatile organic compound (VOC) rules for
approval into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The purpose of these
rules is to satisfy the VOC reasonably available control technology
(RACT) requirement for the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area. These rules are approvable because they satisfy the control and
enforceability requirements of RACT, including Ohio's requirement

to adopt VOC RACT rules for the Control Technique Guideline (CTG)
documents issued by EPA in 2006 and 2007.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 8, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2008-0812, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section,
Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2008-0812. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov website
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Steven Rosenthal at (312)
886-6052 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Rosenthal, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
II. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
III. What is the Purpose of this Action?
IV. What is EPA's Analysis of Ohio's Submitted VOC Rules?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
    2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is proposing to approve several revised and new VOC rules into
the Ohio SIP. Several rule revisions expand applicability to include
sources in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, in
particular for commercial bakery oven facilities, synthetic organic
chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI) reactors and distillation
units, process vents in batch operations, wood furniture manufacturing
operations, and industrial wastewater operations. Ohio adopted new
rules for aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities, ship building
and ship repair operations, plastic parts coating, and the storage of
volatile organic liquids. In addition, Ohio adopted new rules and
revisions to existing rules to address the CTGs issued by EPA in 2006
and 2007. These CTG categories are lithographic printing, industrial
solvent cleaning, flat wood paneling, paper coating, metal furniture
coating, large appliance coating, and flexible package printing. Ohio
adopted several other minor revisions.

III. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

    The primary purpose of these rules is to satisfy the requirement in
section 182(b) of Part D of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that VOC
RACT rules be adopted for the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. These rules satisfy the requirement for VOC RACT
rules for existing, pre-2006, CTG and major non-CTG source categories
which were due on September 15, 2006, as well as the requirement to
adopt VOC RACT rules for the CTG documents issued by EPA in 2006 and
2007.
    On March 24, 2008 (73 FR 15416), EPA made a finding that Ohio
failed to submit those VOC RACT rules which were due on September 15,
2006, for the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. Ohio
submitted the fully adopted required VOC RACT rules to EPA on September
4, 2008. In a

November 19, 2008, letter to Ohio, EPA confirmed that Ohio's September
4, 2008, submittal satisfies the requirement for VOC RACT for existing,
pre-2006, CTG and major non-CTG source categories which was due on
September 15, 2006. Failure to submit a complete VOC RACT submittal
would have triggered the offset sanction identified in CAA section
179(b)(2) on September 24, 2009, and the highway funding sanction in
accordance with CAA section 179(b)(1) on March 24, 2010. EPA will be
required by CAA section 110(c) to promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) if it has not approved these VOC RACT rules into Ohio's SIP
by March 24, 2010.
    Finalization of the action proposed here would end any obligation
for EPA to promulgate a FIP addressing this VOC RACT requirement.
    After September 4, 2008, Ohio completed additional rulemaking on
rules to address CTGs issued in September 2006 and September 2007.
Ohio's submittal of March 23, 2009, incorporates the rule revisions
submitted September 4, 2008, as well as the VOC rule revisions adopted
thereafter.

IV. What Is EPA's Analysis of Ohio's Submitted VOC Rules?

(1) 3745-21-01--Definitions

    Revisions to this section primarily consist of new definitions that
are needed to support the new and revised rules. These definitions are
consistent with EPA RACT guidance and are approvable.

(2) 3745-21-02--Ambient Air Quality Standards and Guidelines

    This section is approvable because the carbon monoxide and 8-hour
ozone standards are consistent with EPA standards.

(3) 3745-21-03--Methods of Ambient Air Quality Measurement

    This section is approvable because the carbon monoxide and ozone
measurement methods follow EPA procedures.

(4) 3745-21-04--Compliance Schedules and 3745-21-06--Classification of
Regions

    Section 3745-21-04 requires that compliance be achieved by April 2,
2010, for the new paper coating, metal furniture coating, large
appliance coating, cold cleaning, and packaging rotogravure control
requirements in 3745-21-09. This allows sources to achieve compliance
within one year after the effective date of these new requirements,
which is consistent with EPA RACT policy and is therefore approvable.

(5) 3745-21-08--Control of Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Stationary
Sources

    The requirement that the waste gas stream from a catalyst
regeneration process associated with a petroleum cracking system be
burned at 1300 degrees Fahrenheit was deleted because a conflicting,
but more appropriate, control requirement is in effect for these units
in the New Source Performance Standards and the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Petroleum Refineries. This
section is therefore approvable.

(6) 3745-21-09--Control of VOCs From Stationary Sources

    (A) Applicability--The applicability provisions in this paragraph
are consistent with EPA guidance and are therefore approvable. Section
(A)(6), which applies to paragraph (HH) for plastic parts coating (a
non-CTG source category until September 2008), correctly specifies the
way to establish applicability for major non-CTG sources. Major non-CTG
applicability is determined by adding the potential VOC emissions from
all non-CTG sources at a facility to the unregulated VOC emissions at a
facility. For moderate ozone nonattainment areas, such as the
Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area that is the subject of
this state rule, the non-CTG sources at such a facility are subject to
RACT if the combined unregulated CTG and non-CTG potential VOC
emissions equal or exceed 100 tons per year.
(F) Paper Coating
    (F)(2)--This section adds additional control requirements to paper
coating lines in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
    (F)(2)(a) requires that any paper coating line with potential
emissions equal to or greater than 25.0 tons per year of VOC before the
application of capture and control devices shall either: (i) Employ a
control system in order to reduce total VOC emissions from the paper
coating line by at least 90 percent or maintain an outlet concentration
of 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) or (ii) employ low VOC
coatings.
    (F)(2)(b) contains work practice standards for cleaning materials.
    These revisions to paragraph (F) are consistent with those
contained in the 2007 CTG for Paper, Film, and Foil Coating and are
therefore approvable.
(I) Metal Furniture Coating
    (I)(4)--This section adds additional control requirements for metal
furniture coating lines in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area.
    (I)(4)(a)--This section specifies VOC coating limits for both air-
dried and baked metal furniture coating lines, including limits that
are expressed in terms of pounds of VOC per gallon of coating solids.
These limits allow the use of low VOC coatings or a combination of
coatings and add-on control equipment to meet the mass of VOC per
volume of coating solids limits. Section 3745-21-9(B)(7) also allows
compliance to be achieved with a control system that achieves an
overall reduction of 90 percent from the coating line and in which the
control device has an efficiency of not less than 90 percent.
    (I)(4)(b)--This section exempts the metal furniture coating lines
at a facility if the combined emissions from all lines are less than 15
pounds per day of VOC. It also exempts stencil coatings, safety
indicating coatings, solid film lubricants, touch-up and repair
coatings, and coating application utilizing hand-held aerosol cans.
    (I)(4)(c)--This section requires the use of coating application
methods with good transfer efficiency such as electrostatic
application, flow coating, dip coating, and high volume, low pressure
(HVLP) application equipment.
    (I)(4)(d) and (e)--These sections specify work practice standards
for coating-related activities and cleaning materials.
    The metal furniture control requirements in paragraph (I) are
consistent with those contained in the 2007 CTG for Metal Furniture
Coating and are therefore approvable.
(K) Large Appliance Coating
    (K)(6)--This section adds additional control requirements to large
appliance coating lines in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area.
    (K)(6)(a)--This section specifies VOC coating limits for both air-
dried and baked large appliance coating lines. It also contains VOC
content limits for both air-dried and baked coatings that have the
units of pounds of VOC per gallon of coating solids. These units allow
the use of low-VOC coatings or a combination of coatings and add-on
control equipment to meet the mass of VOC per volume of coating solids
limits. Section 3745-21-9(B)(7) also allows compliance to be achieved
with a control system that achieves an overall reduction of 90 percent
from the coating line and in which the control device has an efficiency
of not less than 90 percent.

    (K)(6)(b)--This section exempts the metal furniture coating lines
at a facility if the combined emissions from all lines are less than 15
pounds per day of VOC. Paragraph (K)(6)(b) also exempts stencil
coatings, safety indicating coatings, solid film lubricants, touch-up
and repair coatings, and coating application utilizing hand-held
aerosol cans.
    (K)(6)(c)--This section requires the use of coating application
methods with good transfer efficiency such as electrostatic
application, flow coating, dip coating, and HVLP application equipment.
    (K)(6)(d) and (e)--These sections specify work practice standards
for coating-related activities and cleaning materials.
    These control requirements in 3745-21-9(K) are consistent with
those contained in the 2007 CTG for Large Appliance Coating and are
therefore approvable.
(O) Solvent Metal Cleaning
    (O)(2)(e)--This section requires that cold cleaners in the
Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area use solvent material
with a vapor pressure that does not exceed 1.0 mm mercury (Hg). This
requirement reduces the volatility and, therefore, the VOC emissions
from cold cleaners in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area and is therefore approvable.
(O)(6) Exemptions
    (O)(6)(c)--This section allows cleaners exceeding 1.0 mm Hg to be
used to clean cured resin from application equipment at facilities
subject to and complying with the requirements of the Reinforced
Plastic Composites Production maximum achievable control technology
(MACT) (40 CFR part 63, Subpart WWWW). This exemption is approvable
because the difficulty of using such low vapor pressure cleaners has
been documented and the increase in emissions would be minimal.
    (O)(6)(d)--This section allows cleaners exceeding 1.0 mm Hg to be
used to clean medical parts subject to regulation by the Food and Drug
Administration and also to clean metal parts subject to Federal
Aviation Administration and Department of Defense cleaning solvent
specifications. However, this exemption is only allowed if the source
adequately documents that there is a conflict between these
specifications and the 1.0 mm Hg vapor pressure requirement in
(O)(2)(e)(i). This exemption is therefore approvable.
    (U)(2)(f)--This section allows Ohio to grant less stringent
miscellaneous metal coating limits if the limits in (U)(1) are
technically or economically infeasible. EPA has objected to previous
versions of this paragraph because previous versions allowed less
stringent limits to take effect without formal EPA SIP review. This
version of paragraph (U)(2)(f) is approvable because it provides that
alternate limits take effect only if EPA after suitable opportunity for
review finds the alternate limit to represent RACT.
(Y)(4)--Flexible Package Printing
    This section adds additional control requirements to packaging
rotogravure and flexographic packaging printing lines in the Cleveland-
Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
    (Y)(4)(a)--Any packaging rotogravure or flexographic packaging
printing line with potential emissions equal to or greater than 25 tons
per year of VOC, before control, must comply with the add-on control
system requirements in (i) or the low VOC requirements in (ii).
    (Y)(4)(a)(i)--Overall control requirements for each subject press
range from 65 percent to 80 percent, depending upon the installation
date of the press and the first installation date of the add-on control
device.
    (Y)(4)(ii)--Coatings used in these printing lines must meet a limit
of 0.8 pound of VOC per pound of solids applied or 0.16 pound of VOC
per pound of coating applied.
    (Y)(4)(b)--This section specifies work practice standards for
cleaning materials that are applicable to all packaging rotogravure or
flexographic packaging printing lines in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area.
    The control requirements in (Y)(4) are consistent with those
contained in the 2006 CTG for Flexible Package Printing and are
therefore approvable.
(HH)--Surface Coating of Automotive/Transportation and Business Machine
Plastic Parts
    This section is approvable because the emission limits are
consistent with EPA's RACT guidance in the Alternative Control
Technology document for this source category. There is a specific VOC
content limit for each type of coating, e.g., 4.1 pounds VOC per gallon
for high bake colorcoat auto interiors. There is also an equivalent
limit in terms of pounds VOC per gallon of solids if a control system
is used to achieve compliance, e.g., 9.3 pounds VOC per gallon of
solids for high bake colorcoat auto interiors.
(DDD) Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
    (4)(e)--This section exempts any gasoline dispensing pump used
solely for dispensing gasoline with an ethanol content of 85 percent
from the gasoline dispensing station control requirements in (DDD)(1).
This exemption is consistent with EPA policy and is therefore
approvable.
    (4)(f)--This section exempts any gasoline dispensing facility where
gasoline is dispensed to a fleet of motor vehicles in which 95 percent
or more of the fleet of motor vehicles being fueled with gasoline is
equipped with onboard refueling vapor recovery. This exemption is
consistent with EPA policy and is therefore approvable.

(7) 3745-21-10--Compliance Test Methods and Procedures

    Ohio made no substantive changes to this section. The changes were
grammatical and primarily revised the manner in which test methods were
referenced. These revisions are approvable.

(8) 3745-21-12--Control of VOC Emissions From Commercial Bakery Oven
Facilities

    Ohio added a new section (A)(2) Applicability for the Cleveland-
Akron area to this existing, and EPA approved, rule for the control of
bakery oven emissions. This new section expands the applicability to
include bakery oven facilities in the Cleveland-Akron moderate ozone
nonattainment area. The revised rule satisfies the requirement for RACT
for these sources and is therefore approvable.

(9) 3745-21-13--Control of VOC Emissions From Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry Reactors and Distillation Units

    Ohio expanded the applicability of this EPA-approved rule to
include the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, which is
required by EPA RACT policy and is therefore approvable. Paragraph
3745-21-13(L) has been revised to require that newly subject sources in
the Cleveland-Akron area are to notify Ohio EPA that they are subject.
The sources are also required to describe their equipment as well as
the means of achieving compliance.

(10) 3745-21-14--Control of VOC Emissions From Process Vents in Batch
Operations

    Ohio expanded the applicability of this EPA-approved rule to
include the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, which is
required by EPA RACT policy and is therefore approvable. Paragraph
3745-21-14(K)

has been revised to require that newly subject sources in the
Cleveland-Akron area are to notify Ohio EPA that they are subject. They
are also required to describe an equipment description, as well as to
describe the means of achieving compliance.

(11) 3745-21-15--Control of VOC Emissions From Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations

    Ohio has expanded the applicability of this EPA-approved rule to
include sources in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
This applicability is required for moderate ozone nonattainment areas
by EPA RACT policy and is approvable. Paragraph 3745-21-15(N) has been
revised to require that newly subject sources in the Cleveland-Akron
area are to notify Ohio EPA that they are subject. They are also
required to provide an equipment description, as well as to describe
the means of achieving compliance.

(12) 3745-21-16--Control of VOC Emissions From Industrial Wastewater
Operations

    Ohio has expanded the applicability of this EPA-approved rule to
include the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, which is
required by EPA RACT policy and is therefore approvable. Ohio has
revised paragraph 3745-21-16(L) to require that newly subject sources
in the Cleveland-Akron area are to notify Ohio EPA that they are
subject. They are also required to provide an equipment description, as
well as to describe the means of achieving compliance.

(13) 3745-21-18--Commercial Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment
Refinishing Operations

    Ohio has expanded the applicability of this EPA-approved rule to
include the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. In
addition, Ohio has added the VOC coating limits from EPA's Subpart B--
National VOC Emission Standards for Automobile Refinish Coatings (40
CFR part 59). These revisions are approvable.

(14) 3745-21-19--Control of VOC Emissions From Aerospace Manufacturing
and Rework Facilities

    This new rule applies to aerospace manufacturing and rework
facilities in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This
rule is consistent with EPA's aerospace CTG and applies to such
facilities with potential to emit of 25.0 tons per year for all
operations combined where aerospace components and vehicles are cleaned
and coated.
    Paragraph (D)(1) contains VOC content limits for primers, topcoats,
chemical milling maskants, and specialty coatings.
    Paragraph (D)(2) allows compliance to be achieved with an emission
control system that achieves an overall reduction of 81 percent. If an
emission control system includes a thermal or catalytic oxidizer, the
control efficiency of the thermal or catalytic oxidizer must be at
least 90 percent.
    Paragraph (D)(4) specifies the allowable application equipment that
can be used and excludes those methods, such as air spray, with low
transfer efficiencies. Paragraph (E) specifies VOC requirements for
cleaning operations. These include requirements for hand wipe cleaning
operations, spray gun cleaning operations, flush cleaning operations,
as well as housekeeping measures for cleaning solvents and solvent-
laden cleaning materials used in cleaning operations. In addition, Ohio
requires compliance either twelve months after the effective date of
the rule (8/25/2009) or upon startup for a new facility. This rule also
contains the appropriate monitoring requirements for a VOC emission
control system, VOC test methods, as well as recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. This rule is approvable because it is
consistent with EPA's 1997 aerospace CTG.

(15) 3745-21-20--Control of VOC Emissions From Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair Operations

    This new rule applies to any shipbuilding or ship repair facility
that is located in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
with potential VOC emissions of 25.0 tons per year or greater. The VOC
control and related requirements are based upon EPA guidance,
especially the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair CTG which is largely based,
in turn, on the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants in Subpart II of 40 CFR part 63.
    Paragraph 3745-21-19(D)(1) specifies the VOC content limits for a
variety of marine coating categories, including a general use coating
category and a number of specialty coating categories.
    Paragraph 3745-21-19(D)(2) allows compliance to be achieved with an
emission control system that achieves emission reductions equivalent to
compliance with the coating limits.
    In addition, Ohio requires compliance either twelve months after
the effective date of the rule (8/25/2009) or upon startup for a new
facility. This rule also contains the appropriate monitoring
requirements for a VOC emission control system, VOC test methods, as
well as recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
    This rule is approvable because it is consistent with EPA's 1996
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair CTG.

(16) 3745-21-21--Storage of VOL Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks and
External Floating Roof Tanks

    This new rule applies to volatile organic liquid (VOL) storage
tanks in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area if the
facility at which the VOL storage tank is located has potential VOC
emissions equal to or greater than 100 tons per year from all VOL
storage tanks, non-CTG sources, and unregulated emissions from VOC
sources. This rule includes control requirements for both fixed roof
tanks with internal floating roofs and fixed roof tanks with closed
vent systems and control devices. For internal floating roof tanks, the
rule specifies three alternative seal systems. For fixed roof tanks
with a closed vent system, the rule requires a 95 percent efficient
control device or a flare. This rule also includes control requirements
for external floating roof tanks, for which the rule requires a closure
device consisting of a primary and secondary seal. The rule also
includes both recordkeeping and reporting requirements. This rule is
consistent with EPA's 1994 alternative control techniques document on
VOL Storage in Floating and Fixed Roof Tanks and is therefore
approvable.

(17) 3745-21-22--Control of VOC Emissions From Offset Lithographic
Printing and Letterpress Printing Facilities

    This new rule applies to offset lithographic and letterpress
printing facilities in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area whose actual VOC emissions, before the application of control
systems, are equal to or greater than three tons of VOCs per rolling
twelve-month period. A heatset web offset lithographic printing press
or a heatset web letterpress printing press with potential VOC ink oil
emissions from the press dryer that are greater than 25 tons per year
before control must maintain the dryer air pressure lower than the
pressroom air pressure and operate a control system that achieves 90
percent control (or 95 percent control for a control system installed
after the effective date of this rule) or maintain a maximum VOC outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv. This rule restricts the VOC content of
fountain solutions used by offset

lithographic presses, based on the type of offset lithographic press in
use at a facility. Cleaning solutions used on subject lithographic or
letterpress printing presses must either be at or below 70 percent by
weight VOC or be at or below ten mm Hg at 20 degrees Celsius. This rule
also contains the appropriate test methods for determining the VOC
concentration of the exhaust stream and the VOC content of the fountain
solution and cleaning solution. This rule includes methods to determine
the vapor pressure of the cleaning solution. The rule also includes
monitoring and recordkeeping requirements to ensure that the control
systems are operating properly, to establish whether the VOC content of
the cleaning solution and fountain solution are in compliance with the
applicable limits, and to establish whether an offset lithographic or
letterpress printing facility is subject to one or more of the control
requirements of the rule. This rule is approvable because it is
consistent with EPA's 2006 CTG for Offset Lithographic Printing and
Letterpress Printing.

(18) 3745-21-23--Control of VOC Emissions From Industrial Solvent
Cleaning Operations

    This new rule applies to facilities with solvent cleaning
operations in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour ozone nonattainment area whose
actual VOC emissions from all solvent cleaning operations is equal to
or greater than 15 pounds VOC per day. Those source categories with VOC
rules that contain their own solvent cleaning control requirements,
e.g., aerospace coating and flexible package printing, are exempt from
this rule.
    This rule contains a general restriction on the VOC content of
cleaning materials used of 0.42 pounds VOC per gallon. The rule also
contains higher limits for specialty cleaning operations such as
cleaning electronic components and medical devices. This rule specifies
the use of certain cleaning methods, e.g., wipe cleaning, and prohibits
others, e.g., atomizing any solvent unless the emissions are vented to
VOC emission control equipment. As an alternative to the VOC content
limitations in this rule, a facility may use solvents or solvent
solutions which have a VOC composite partial vapor pressure of less
than or equal to eight mm of Hg.
    The rule includes several exemptions, e.g., graffiti removal and
the stripping of cured coatings, for which solvent cleaning
restrictions are not feasible. EPA Method 24 is specified for
determining the VOC content of solvent material and American Society of
Testing Material (ASTM) D2879 is specified for determining the vapor
pressure of each component. Recordkeeping requirements include the name
and identification of each cleaning material used and the VOC content
or the VOC composite vapor pressure of each cleaning material used.
    This rule is approvable because it is consistent with EPA RACT
guidance, particularly the 2006 CTG for Industrial Cleaning Solvents.

(19) 3745-21-24--Flat Wood Paneling Coatings

    This new rule applies to facilities in the Cleveland-Akron 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area whose actual VOC emissions from all flat wood
paneling coating lines is equal to or greater than 15 pounds VOC per
day. This rule limits subject facilities to a VOC content limitation of
2.1 pounds of VOC per gallon of coating or, if an add-on control device
is used, a minimum overall control efficiency of 90 percent by weight.
    This rule specifies the type of application equipment that can be
used in order to eliminate the use of application equipment with low
transfer efficiency. In addition, the rule sets work practice standards
that minimize VOC emissions from all coatings, thinners, and cleaning
materials. These work practice standards require the storage and
transfer of all such materials in closed containers or pipes in order
to minimize emissions.
    This rule is approvable because it is consistent with EPA RACT
guidance, particularly the 2006 CTG for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 27, 2009.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E9-10658 Filed 5-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 22)]
[Notices]
[Page 6180-6181]
[DOCID:fr01fe08-63]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148; FRL-8524-2]

Board of Scientific Counselors, Computational Toxicology
Subcommittee Meeting--February 2008

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development (ORD), gives notice of one meeting of the Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Computational Toxicology Subcommittee.

DATES: The meeting (via conference call) will be held on Wednesday,
February 20, 2008 from 10 a.m. to 12 noon eastern time. The meeting may
adjourn early if all business is finished. Requests for the draft
agenda or for making oral presentations at the meeting will be accepted
up to 1 business day before the meeting.

ADDRESSES: Participation in the conference call will be by
teleconference only--a meeting room will not be used. Members of the
public may obtain the call-in number and access code for the call from
Lorelei Kowalski, whose contact information is listed under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. Submit your
comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148, by one of
the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.

     Fax: Fax comments to:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.
     Mail: Send comments by mail to: Board of Scientific
Counselors, Computational Toxicology Subcommittee Meetings--end 2007/
early 2008 Docket, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.
     Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver comments to: EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Room B102, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-
1148.

    Note: This is not a mailing address. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2007-1148. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site

is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov
 index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Board of

Scientific Counselors, Computational Toxicology Subcommittee Meetings--
end 2007/early 2008 Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the ORD Docket is (202) 566-
1752.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer via
mail at: Lorelei Kowalski, Mail Code 8104-R, Office of Science Policy,
Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via phone/voice
mail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; via fax at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via e-mail at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

General Information

    Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft BOSC
agenda or making a presentation at the meeting may contact Lorelei
Kowalski, the Designated Federal Officer, via any of the contact
methods listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. In
general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to
a total of three minutes.
    Proposed agenda item for the meeting includes, but is not limited
to: Discussion of the subcommittee's draft report on ORD's National
Center for Computational Toxicology (NCCT). The meeting is open to the
public. The subcommittee roster and charge can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/subcomm-ctox.htm
.

    Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities: For
information on access or services for individuals with disabilities,
please contact Lorelei Kowalski at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a disability,

please contact Lorelei Kowalski, preferably at least 10 days prior to
the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your
request.

    Dated: January 28, 2008.
Jeff Morris,
Acting Director, Office of Science Policy.
 [FR Doc. E8-1852 Filed 1-31-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P