Supporting Statement

for

Information Collection Request

Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for Nonroad
Compression-ignition and On-highway Heavy Duty Engines

(Final Rule for Alternative Fuel

Conversions of Heavy-Duty Engines)

EPA ICR 1864.17

OMB Control Number 2060-0287

February 2011

Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

Office of Air and Radiation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

1.	Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) 	Title And Number Of The Information Collection

	Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for Nonroad
Compression-ignition and On-highway Heavy Duty Engines (Final Rule for
Clean Alternative Fuel Conversions of Heavy-Duty Engines); EPA ICR
number 1684.17, OMB Control Number 2060-0287.

1(b) 	Short Characterization/Abstract

	The Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing changes designed to
simplify and lessen the burdens for manufacturers seeking approval to
introduce into commerce in the U.S. light-duty vehicles, light-duty
trucks, medium-duty passenger vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles and
engines that have been converted for use of fuels that the original
models were not designed for, such as from gasoline to liquid propane
gas (LPG) or compressed natural gas (CNG). This ICR covers the
heavy-duty portion of the final rule.  The proposed rule was submitted
under EPA ICR Number 1684.15.

	These changes would start taking effect with the 2011 conversion model
year or upon the effective date of the final rule.  Starting then,
manufacturers will be given expanded options for submitting simplified
applications. ICRs normally have a three year time horizon. This ICR
will cover the expected paperwork burden changes for the three years
after the effective date of the final rule.

Under previous iterations of this ICR, EPA analyzed the cost of
obtaining a certificate of conformity under current regulations and used
that as a baseline cost.  This Supporting Statement addresses only the
anticipated paperwork burden of the Clean Alternative Fuel Vehicle and
Engine Conversions final rule in relation to the existing baseline.
Also, it should be noted that this Supporting Statement amends the
Supporting Statement submitted in May 2010 (under EPA ICR Number
1684.15) by replacing the OBD requirement for intermediate-age and
outside-useful life conversions with the procedure already established
in 40 CFR 85.2222.

It is important to note that HD conversions have not received as much
interest as LD conversions.   As a result, EPA’s experience with and
data available on HD conversions is limited.  For example, in model year
(MY) 2008, EPA only received seven certification applications from four
different converters. In 2009, the number drop to three applications
from three different manufacturers. Despite limited historical data on
HD conversions, EPA has evaluated the cost a converter would incur to
fully certify a HD engine that has been converted at each of the three
engine age categories offered in this rulemaking: (1) beginning of
useful life, (2) mid-useful life, and (3) outside the useful life.
These costs are then compared to the baseline -- the current cost of
certification.

	It has been estimated that a total of 8 manufacturers will respond to
this collection (proposed rule only) with an approximate cost of
$757,468.

Section 2: Need For And Use of the Collection

2(a) Need/Authority For The Collection

	Under Title II of the Clean Air Act (CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.), EPA
is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for motor vehicle
designs that comply with applicable emission standards set under section
202(a)(1) of the Act.  A manufacturer must have a certificate before
vehicles may be legally introduced into commerce.  To insure compliance
with the Act, EPA reviews product information and manufacturer test
results; EPA also tests some vehicles to confirm manufacturer results.

	Section 203 of the CAA contains “anti-tampering” provisions
prohibiting alteration of OEM vehicle components relevant to the
vehicle’s certification under the Act.  Regulations at 40 CFR, Part
85, Subpart F, provide exemption for aftermarket conversion systems from
these tampering prohibitions for those converters complying with the
regulations of that Part. Under Subpart F, these exemptions were
administered through a certification process that is modeled on the OEM
certification provisions: converters submit certification requests for
engine families, and those that satisfy EPA’s regulations upon review
are granted certificates of conformity for one model year.  The modified
program will recognize two other age-based categories which permit an
exemption from the prohibition on tampering that does not result in a
certificate of conformity.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

	EPA uses information to verify that the proper engine prototypes have
been selected and that the necessary testing has been performed to
assure compliance with emission standards.

	EPA uses the information requested to support various enforcement
actions as mandated by the CAA.  This information collection enables EPA
to ensure that engine manufacturers are complying with applicable
emission regulations, measure the impact of engines' emissions on air
quality, and take corrective actions as needed.

	The information will be received and used by HDNEG/CISD/OTAQ/OAR.
Non-confidential portions of the information submitted to HDNEG is
available to and used by importers, environmental groups, members of the
public and local, state and federal government organizations.

Section 3: Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a) Nonduplication

	The information requested under this ICR is required by statute.
Because of its specialized (and sometimes confidential) nature, and the
fact that it must be submitted to EPA prior to the start of production,
the information collected is not available from any other source.

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

	An announcement of the public comment period for this ICR renewal was
published in the Federal Register on May 26, 2010 (75 FR2 9606).  This
document may be accessed through the Federal Register's website at
HYPERLINK "http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html"
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html .

3(c) Consultations

	The burden estimates described in this ICR is based on the HD
certification program burden already approved by OMB under ICR 1684.
EPA sought comment on these estimates through the FR notice mentioned in
Section 3(b).  The comments received dealt with the regulation itself
and are discussed in the preamble of the final rule.  No comments were
received regarding the estimates presented in this Supporting Statement.

As a result of the comments received, EPA has streamlined the way
converters can demonstrate compliance with OBD requirements.  Now EPA
will be accepting an OBD scan tool report and a statement about the
integrity of the OBD system in lieu of OBD test data or a description of
an OBD compliance strategy. This Supporting Statement reflects that
change.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

As required by the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7525(a)), emission information
is currently submitted on a yearly basis coinciding with the
manufacturer’s “model year.”  EPA allows applicants to define
their own “model year”, thus granting some flexibility in this
regard.  Major product changes typically occur at the start of a model
year. For these reasons, a collection frequency longer than a model year
is not normally possible.  However, this rule would replace the annual
application process with a one-time submittal for intermediate age and
outside useful life engines, only requiring an end of year sales volume
submission. In addition many conversion manufacturers will no longer
need to renew their certificate of conformity. Furthermore, if the OEM
engine design is “carried over” to a subsequent model year, the
amount of new information required is substantially reduced.

3(e) General Guidelines

	According to 40 CFR 86.098-7, certification related records must be
maintained for eight years.  Note that "records may be retained as hard
copy or reduced to microfilm, ADP film, etc., depending on the
manufacturer's record retention procedure, provided that in every case
all the information contained in the hard copy is retained."  These
recordkeeping requirements stem, in large part, from the statutory
requirement to warrant some items for long periods of time.  In
addition, the manufacturers must comply with requirements to recall
vehicles and engines failing to meet emission standards during their
useful lives.

	Manufacturers are required to submit confidential business information
such as sales projections and certain sensitive technical descriptions
(Please see section 4(b)(i) for reference).  This information is kept
confidential in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, EPA
regulations at 40 CFR Part 2, and class determinations issued by EPA's
Office of General Counsel.  Also, non-proprietary information submitted
by manufacturers for certification is held as confidential until the
specific vehicle or engine to which it pertains is available for
purchase. The non-proprietary information submitted to support
intermediate age and outside useful life submissions may be made
available once the notification has been submitted to EPA.

	This information collection activity complies with the remaining
guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.  The proposal makes no changes in the
reporting and recordkeeping provisions that impact any of the guidelines
for information collections as approved in the existing approved
collection.

3(f) Confidentiality

	Manufacturers are allowed to assert a claim of confidentiality over
information provided to EPA.  Confidentiality is provided in accordance
with the Freedom of Information Act and EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part
2.  For further detail, refer to section 3(e).

3(g) Sensitive Questions

	No sensitive questions are asked in this information collection.

Section 4: Respondents and Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

	Respondents are manufacturers of non-road engines within the following
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes:

336312 Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data items

	The information and reporting burden associated with this rule occurs
within the context of EPA’s motor vehicle and engine certification and
compliance programs.  Currently requested data items related to
heavy-duty engine certification are discussed in detail in ICR 1684.12.
Converters seeking certification for engines converted at the beginning
of their useful lives are expected to go through current certification
procedures.  However, under the revised rule, the amount of information
collected from converters will be reduced due to the provision that will
allow the grouping of multiple engine families into a larger one.
Currently, engine manufacturers and converters must submit one
certification application per engine family, as currently defined in the
regulations.  Under the revised rule, converters of new and nearly new
engines will be able to obtain one certificate for a group of engine
families.  Engine families must share certain characteristics before
they can be combined into a larger family.  This provision may reduce
converters reporting burden by up to 50%.

Converters of intermediate age engines will be able to submit a
simplified testing demonstration without the burdens of the formal
certification application process. Intermediate age engine converters
will also benefit from not having to pay the certification fee currently
required under the authority of Section 217 of the CAA and the
Independent Offices Appropriation Act (31 U.S.C. 9701).

Converters of engines outside their useful life will also benefit from a
reduced burden.  EPA sought comment from the public on the suitability
of three proposed options to provide adequate demonstration of
compliance. “Option 3” is being finalized which requires an OBD scan
tool test procedure report and a detailed technical description of the
conversion system sufficient in detail for EPA to confirm the conversion
system’s ability to maintain or improve on emission levels in the
converted engine.

In general, all reporting formats will describe the major aspects of the
proposed product line, technical details of the emission control
systems, and the results of any required tests to indicate compliance
with the emissions limitations.

	The following is a list of data items added or revised by the rule.  As
mentioned above, ICR 1864.12 lists the rest of the data items currently
required for certification and that would apply to converters of new and
nearly new engines applying for certificates of conformity.

For all engines:

expanded  conversion engine families

new engine label requirement describing OEM engine family, mileage, and
date

For intermediate-age and outside useful-life age vehicles (25%)

online notification and test result report rather than application for
certification (savings in “paperwork” burden) or “demonstration”
for intermediate age  and outside useful life conversions

OBD scan tool report showing results of an OBD scan tool test procedure

A statement that the OBD system remains fully functional in the
converted engine.

Intermediate age and outside useful life engine families will not be
required to pay a certification fee.

(ii) Respondent Activities

	While there is no “typical” converter respondent, all converters
must submit a description of their product and other information.. As
described in Section 4(b)(i), in some cases the current application and
certification process will be replaced with an alternative, simpler
process for intermediate age and outside useful life programs.
Converters of new and nearly new engines will carry-out the same
activities as other engine manufacturers currently seeking
certification.

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

Agency Activities

	In general, EPA officials carry out the following activities:

Review and interpret regulations, provide guidance;

Review the applications for completeness and accuracy;

Verify that the correct engines have been selected and tested;

Verify compliance with applicable provisions;

Request additional information if needed;

Answer questions from manufacturers and the public;

Issue appropriate certificates of conformity, as applicable;

Periodically perform maintenance or enhance the database;

Make data available to the public;

Analyze and manage requests for confidentiality;

Determining if "carry over" of data from a previous model year is
appropriate or if new testing will be required; and

Store, file and maintain data.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

	EPA currently makes extensive use of electronic media in gathering and
evaluating information from engine manufacturers.  EPA expects to
receive the information submitted by converters in electronic format as
well.

	Once the information is received it will be entered into a database and
reviewed for completeness.  If the manufacturer chooses to make hard
copy submittals, then EPA manually enters the information into the
database.  The certification reviewer analyses the information to ensure
compliance with the CAA and applicable regulations.

	Currently, the public can access non-confidential portions of the
certification applications and test data by contacting HDNEG or through
the Engine Certification Information Center at    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm"
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/certdata.htm .  Non-confidential certification
information submitted by alternative fuel converters will also be posted
at that website.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	Small on-highway engine manufacturers may use optional procedures
outlined in 40 CFR part 86, subpart A to demonstrate compliance with the
general standards and specific emission requirements.  These procedures,
also available to HD converters, and apply to conversion manufacturers
with US sales of fewer than 10,000 units.  The alternate procedures
reduce small volume conversion manufacturers' burden associated with
durability data requirements, testing, determination of deterioration
factors and certification test data.  Converters may also request EPA to
assign deterioration factors, thus eliminating the durability testing
burden.

Small volume conversion manufacturers are also exempt from some
reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated to the certification
of evaporative families (86.098-14).

	EPA can also approve a reduction in the certification application fee
upon request by the manufacturer.  A fee waiver could be granted if:
(1) the certificate is to be used to sell engines within the United
States; and (2) the full fee exceeds 1% of the aggregate projected
retail sales price of all vehicles covered by the certificate of
conformity.  Although this is a provision available to all
manufacturers, it is beneficial to some small manufacturers.  Section
6(b)(ii) provides more details.

5(d) Collection Schedule

	Collection of certification data (or demonstration data when
applicable) on a per engine family basis occurs on occasion.  Overall
collection frequency is largely determined by the converter's marketing
and product plans.  For all age-based categories, information must be
submitted before the start of production For new and nearly new
vehicles, a  certificate of conformity must be obtained before the start
of production. Manufacturers submit information, such as an end of year
sales report on an annual basis and will submit their applications for
certification and intermediate age and outside useful life notifications
at their earliest convenience.

	Running change and correction applications will be submitted by
manufacturers as the need occurs.

Section 6: Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden (Hours)

	Since the current process for certifying an engine family will remain
basically unchanged for converted families, burden estimates were taken
from the previous supporting statement in this ICR series. Costs have
been updated and reflect the impact of the new, broader definition of
engine family by this rule. Tables 1 through 3 summarize the
respondents’ overall burden associated with this ICR.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

Estimating labor costs

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 To estimate labor costs, EPA used the Bureau of
Labor Statistics' May 2008 industry specific occupational hourly wage
estimates for the Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry (NAICS 336100).
EPA then increased the hourly wage estimates by a factor of 2.1 to
account for benefits and overhead.  The specific rates used are listed
below.  These are mean hourly rates.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Table 4

Labor Costs Estimates

Occupation	SOC Code Number	Mean Hourly Rate (BLS)	2.1 Factor for
Overhead and Benefits

Mechanical  Engineers	17-2141	$37.59 	$78.94

Engineering Managers	 11-9041	$54.56 	$114.58

Lawyers	23-1011	$67.14	$140.99

Secretaries, Except Legal, Medical and Executive	43-6014	$19.76 	$41.50

(ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

	The Operation and Maintenance costs (O&M Costs) in this ICR look
somewhat different from those explained in the rule preamble.  The
language in the preamble considers the costs an individual converter may
incur in its effort to obtain exemption from the prohibition on
tampering via this regulation. Since conversion manufacturers can
sometimes “carry-over” test data from one model year to the next,
further cost reductions may be achieved. In this ICR, one time costs
such as testing have been annualized.

So far, all HD converters are small businesses.  EPA believes this will
still be the case after this rule is finalized.  Small businesses
contract outside laboratories to perform testing.  Therefore, there are
no capital start-up costs associated with this collection.

	EPA has estimated that testing at a private facility costs, on average,
$30,000.  Evaporative testing costs, on average, $7,050.  Testing cost,
however, is a one-time cost per engine family since manufacturers can
carry over emissions data from one model year to the next.  This cost
has been annualized over the approval period requested for this ICR (3
years).

Heavy-Duty and Large Nonroad CI:	$10,000

Evaporative testing:	  $2,350

	New and nearly new engines require certificates of conformity and
require a fee when submitting an application for a certificate of
conformity.  This fee is requested under the authority of the CAA
Section 217.  EPA published a revision to its 2010 schedule of fees in
the document CISD-09-05.  The relevant fees for calendar year 2010 are:

Federal Exhaust Certificate:	$35,967

Evaporative-only:			     $511

	The fees rule provides for a reduction in fee when "the full fee
exceeds 1.0 percent of the projected aggregate retail price of all
vehicles or engines covered by that certificate" (69 FR 26226, Section
F).  The reduced fee must not exceed one percent of the aggregate retail
price of the vehicles and engines covered by the certificate.

Since all respondents are small businesses and no laboratories will be
built or modified to comply with the new rule, there are no capital
start-up costs associated with this collection.

	Other O&M Costs associated with this information collection include
CDs, photocopying, postage and other shipping expenses, calls, and
testing costs.  CDs may be  used by manufacturers to submit their
electronic applications and to keep records.

(iii)  Start-up Costs

Under the new clean alternative fuel conversions rule, converters of
intermediate-age and outside-useful-life engines will be able to
demonstrate compliance with OBD requirements by submitting an OBD scan
tool report.  Therefore, converters will need to acquire OBD scan tools.
 EPA has found that most OBD scan tools for HD trucks range vary widely,
depending on the size of the vehicle.  For smaller trucks (under 14,000
lbs), OBD scan tools range between $90 and $1,000.  The less expensive
ones are usually specific to a particular vehicle make and model.  For
trucks weighing between 14,001 lbs and 33,000 lbs, OBD scan tools range
between $1,300 and $2,500, but most cost around $1,500.  For the largest
trucks (over 33,000 lbs), scan tools cost as much as $8,000.

In recent years, EPA has received alternative fuel conversion
applications only for truck engines below 14,000 lbs.  However, since
this rule streamlines and lowers the cost of complying with the
conversion regulations, EPA expects more businesses to venture into
clean alternative fuel conversions.  Therefore, it is plausible that
responders will seek to convert engines for heavier trucks.  For the
purpose of this ICR, EPA has chosen to use $1,500 as an estimate for a
scanning tool.  Since all respondents to this collection, especially
those converting intermediate-age and outside-useful-life engines, are
expected to be small business with limited production, EPA estimates
that respondents will purchase an average of three OBD scan tools in the
next three years.

Many OBD scan tools have software specific to a certain range of models
and model years.  EPA estimates that converters may need to purchase
software updates at least once in the three-year period covered by this
ICR.  The cost of these updates range between $300 and $800.  EPA will
use the average, $550, to estimate capital costs.

Total costs per respondent, annualized over a three year period, are:

OBD scan tool for HD engines		$1,500

Software updates for new models		$183

(iv)  Annualizing capital costs

EPA has used the period covered by this ICR to annualize the cost of the
OBD scan tool and software updates.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden

	Table 5 summarizes EPA's overall additional burden associated with the
rule.  Table 6 below summarizes EPA's labor.  These costs are based on
2010 hourly wage rates obtained from the Office of Personnel Management
and adjusted by a factor of 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead.

Table 6

Agency Labor Costs

Occupation	Hourly Rate	160%

Engineer (GS-13/10)	$55.46 	$88.74

Lawyers (GS-13/10)	$55.46 	$88.74

Managers (GS-15)	$65.23 	$104.37

SES-1	$99.00 	$158.40

Senior ( SEE Program)	$13.81 	$20.72 (see text below)

The salary of a senior from the Senior Environmental Employment (SEE)
Program for clerical support is $13.81 per hour plus approximately 150%
increase for benefits, for a total of $20.72.  EPA also pays $2,151.83
as an administrative fee to the Senior Services America, Inc., the
organization from which EPA’s SEE Employees are obtained. These data
were obtained from HDNEG’s financial officer.

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

Interest in HD conversions has been low in the past.  In model year
2008, EPA received only seven applications for certification from a
total of four converters; while in 2009, only three of those converters
submitted one application each.  EPA understands that this is in part
due to converters not submitting an application until they find a market
for the engines. The amount of engines in a HD engine family is
typically lower than the amount of engines in a LD test group.  Since
the cost of certification is spread over a smaller pool of engines, it
is more expensive to certify a HD family on a per engine basis.  This
fact discourages many companies from seeking certification for
heavy-duty products.

Based on the experience of EPA certification reviewers, the Agency
estimates that interest in heavy-duty conversions certification may
double as a result of the rule. This is due to the ability to combine
engine families into a larger group that could be certified as one
family with only one emissions test.  EPA estimates that eight
converters will seek certification for 12 converted heavy-duty engine
families (under the new, expanded definition) in the rule.

	Since the process for demonstrating emission requirements differ
depending on the age of the engines being converted, EPA has accounted
for each stage separately.

New and Nearly New Engine Conversions

Converters of new and nearly new engines must seek full certification.
There are three distinct costs these converters will incur.

Exhaust emissions certification: Table 1 summarizes burden and costs for
exhaust certification of these families.

Evaporative emissions certification: Converters will also need to obtain
a certificate of conformity with evaporative emission requirements.
Table 2 summarizes costs and burden associated with evaporative
certification.

OBD compliance demonstration.

Currently, alternative fuel converters are required to submit test data
to demonstrate compliance with OBD regulations.  However, 40 CFR
86.010-18(o) provides exemptions for small volume and alternative fueled
engines used in applications over 14,000 lbs.  All HD converters who
have sought EPA certification in recent years have been able to claim
one of these exemptions.

In an effort to also reduce costs for those HD manufacturers who are not
able to claim this exemption, EPA is accepting approval issued by either
the California Air Resource Board (CARB) or the EPA Light-duty (LD)
Certification Program as proof of compliance.  Manufacturers must
demonstrate how the OBD system they have designed to comply with
California OBD requirements also complies with the intent of federal
requirements.  So far, HD manufacturers have been able to either claim
the exemption or submit approval from CARB or the LD Team. Therefore,
EPA does not have historical data to use as basis for OBD demonstrations
specifically related to HD conversions.

 Based on past experience with both HD engine and conversion engine
certification, EPA estimates that all converters will be able to use one
the provisions described above to avoid the cost of HD OBD compliance
through the period covered by this ICR.  The cost of LD OBD compliance
demonstration is already accounted for in ICR series 783.

If we needed to account for these costs now, EPA considers it
appropriate to adopt for HD the estimates developed by the LD program
described in ICR 783.55: $26,317.

Intermediate age Engine Conversions

Under the final rule, converters of intermediate age engines will be
required to gather and submit all required data, including test data.
However, the rule does not require EPA to issue a certificate of
conformity for intermediate age engines.  Instead, the Agency will
collect the data and audit it from time to time.  In addition, to
demonstrate compliance with OBD requirements, converters of
intermediate-age engines will need to submit a print-out of the OBD scan
results (per the procedure already established in 40 CFR 85.2222) and
attest that the OBD system remains fully functional in the converted
engine.  EPA will not issue a certificate of conformity, and fees will
not be collected.

As a result, the cost of testing for intermediate age engine conversions
will be the same as for new and nearly new engine conversions with the
exception of fees and OBD demonstration costs.  Table 3 shows these
costs and burden.

EPA believes that there is little interest in intermediate age engine
conversions. Therefore, EPA has estimated that two manufacturers will
participate in the intermediate age program for one engine family each.

	iii. Outside-useful life conversions

After careful evaluation of comments received, EPA has decided to adopt
Option #3 of the proposed rule for outside useful life conversions.
This approach requires manufacturers to submit a technical description
of the conversion that provides sufficient detail for EPA to evaluate
emissions performance and durability. In some cases this technical
description may need to include emission test data to demonstrate that
the conversion system will not degrade emissions. Conversion
manufacturers must also submit an OBD scan tool report.

EPA would expect the maximum testing costs for this option to be
equivalent to those costs incurred for intermediate age engines, since
conducting all testing required for the intermediate age engine program
would be an acceptable demonstration of good engineering judgment.
Intermediate-age engine conversions must also submit an OBD scan tool
report.

Based on past experience, EPA does not expect to have any respondents
interested in outside-useful-life conversions.  Therefore, no burden is
allocated for these conversions in this ICR.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

(i)  Respondent Tally

Table 6

Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary

Program (Age of Converted Engine)	Number of Respondents	Number of
Activities	Total Hours Per Year	Total Labor Cost Per Year	Total Annual
Capital Costs	Total Annual O&M Costs	Total Costs

New and Nearly New Exhaust Cert	8	12	1,002	 $   86,279 	       -   	 $
562,744 	 $  649,023

New and Nearly New Evaporative Cert	8	8	354	 $   29,177 	       -   	 $
 34,408 	 $    63,585

Intermediate Age	2	12	222	 $   19,622 	$3,366	 $   21,871 	 $    44,860

Outside Useful Life	              -   	             -   	              -
  	                -   	       -   	               -
-

Total:	8	32	1,578	 $  135,078 	      $3,366	 $ 619,023 	 $  757,468

(ii)  The Agency Tally

Table 7

Total Estimated Agency Burden and Cost Summary

Program (Age of Converted Engine)	Number of Respondents	Number of
Activities	Total Hours Per Year	Total Labor Cost Per Year	Total Annual
Capital Costs	Total Annual O&M Costs	Total Costs

All programs	8	12	3,101	 $  237,382 	 $        -   	 $  604 	 $ 237,986

6(f) Reasons for change in burden

	The burden described in this ICR adds to the existing inventory for
this ICR series.  This increase is due to the expected increase in
respondents as well as increased capital start-up costs.

6(g) Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is, on average, 197 hours per respondent
(1,578 total hours/8 respondents).  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
currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA’s
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.

	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-OAR-2009-0299, which is available for online viewing at
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov , or in
person viewing at the Air And Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington,
DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The
telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is also (202)
566-1742.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at
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, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0299 and OMB Control Number 2060-0287 in any
correspondence.

 PAGE

 PAGE   14


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 7, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76295-76297]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31226]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[USCG-2011-0231]
RIN 1625-AA01

Anchorage Regulations; Wells, ME

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing three special anchorage areas
in Wells Harbor, Wells, Maine. This action is necessary to facilitate
safe navigation in that area and provide safe and secure anchorages for
vessels not more than 20 meters in length. This action is intended to
increase the safety of life and property in Wells Harbor, improve the
safety of anchored vessels, and provide for the overall safe and
efficient flow of vessel traffic and commerce.

DATES: This rule is effective January 6, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket USCG-2011-0231 and are available online by going to
http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0231 in the ``Keyword''
box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. John J. Mauro, Waterways Management Branch Chief,
First Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    On August 23, 2011, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Wells, Maine'' in the Federal
Register (76 FR 52599). We received no comments on the proposed rule. A
public meeting was not requested and none was held.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this rule is 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236,
2030, 2035, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to
define anchorage grounds.
    This rule is intended to reduce the risk of vessel collisions by
creating three special anchorage areas in the western, central and
eastern portions of Wells Harbor creating anchorage for approximately
150 vessels.

Background

    This rule creates three new special anchorage areas in Wells,
Maine. These three new special anchorage areas in Wells Harbor are
described below. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983 (NAD
83).
    Vessels not more than 20 meters in length are not required to sound
signals as per Rule 35 of the Inland Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2035)
nor exhibit anchor lights or shapes as per Rule 30 of the Inland
Navigation Rules (33 U.S.C. 2030) when at anchor in a special anchorage
area. Mariners utilizing the anchorage areas are encouraged to contact
local and state authorities, such as the local harbormaster, to ensure
compliance with any additional applicable state and local laws. Such
laws may involve, for example, compliance with direction from the local
harbormaster when placing or using moorings within the anchorage.

Discussion of Comments and Changes

    The Coast Guard received no comments on the proposed rulemaking. We
have finalized the rule as proposed, without change.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it
under that Order.
    Although this regulation may have some impact on the public, the
potential impact will be minimized for the following reasons: Normal
surface navigation will not be affected as this area has been
historically used as a mooring field by the Town of Wells and the
number of vessels using the anchorage is limited due to depth (less
than or equal to 18 feet).

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule could affect the following

entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of recreational and small fishing vessels intending to anchor
in Wells Harbor. The rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons:
normal surface navigation will not be affected as this area has been
historically used as a mooring field by the Town of Wells and the
number of vessels using the anchorage is limited due to depth (less
than or equal to 18 feet).

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM we offered to
assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they could
better evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking
process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-(888) 734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(f) of the Instruction because it involves the
establishment of special anchorage grounds. An environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in
the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471; 1221 through 1236, 2030, 2035, 2071;
33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  110.9 to subpart A to read as follows:

Sec.  110.9  Wells Harbor, Maine.

    (a) Anchorage ``A''. All of the waters enclosed by a line beginning
at latitude 43[deg]19'15.7'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'42.1'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'15.7'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'40.3'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'2.6'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'45.7'' W; thence to
latitude 43[deg]19'3.7'' N, longitude 70[deg]33'42.6'' W;

thence to the point of beginning. This area is approximately 5,800 sq.
yards, encompassing the central portion of Wells Harbor.
    (b) Anchorage ``B''. All of the waters enclosed by a line beginning
at latitude 43[deg]19'11.1'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'49.8'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'10.5'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'47.3'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'8.7'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'50.6'' W; thence to
latitude 43[deg]19'8.3'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'47.3 W; thence to the
point of beginning. This area is approximately 25,000 sq. yards,
encompassing the western portion of Wells Harbor.
    (c) Anchorage ``C''. All of the waters enclosed by a line beginning
at latitude 43[deg]19'17.7'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'34.0'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'18.4'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'32.9'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'13.0'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'26.2'' W; thence
to latitude 43[deg]19'13.8'' N, longitude 070[deg]33'25.5'' W; thence
to the point of beginning. This area is approximately 8,200 sq. yards,
encompassing the eastern portion of Wells Harbor.
    (d) Regulations: This area is principally for use by yachts and
other recreational craft. Temporary floats or buoys for marking anchors
or moorings in place are allowed in this area. Fixed mooring piles or
stakes are not allowed. All moorings or anchors shall be placed well
within the anchorage areas so that no portion of the hull or rigging
will at any time extend outside of the anchorage.

    Note to Sec.  110.9:  All anchoring in the areas is under the
supervision of the Wells Harbor Master or other such authority as
may be designated by the authorities of the Town of Wells, Maine.
All coordinates referenced use datum: NAD 83.

    Dated: November 21, 2011.
Daniel A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-31226 Filed 12-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 19)]
[Notices]
[Page 4910-4912]
[DOCID:fr30ja06-48]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0471; FRL-7760-1]

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Rescheduled Public
Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The February 14 - 16, 2006, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (FIFRA SAP) meeting to
consider the Review of Worker Exposure Assessment Methods has been
rescheduled.

DATES: The meeting will now be held on April 4 - 6, 2006, from 8:30
a.m. to approximately 5 p.m., eastern time.
    Comments: For the deadlines for the submission of requests to
present oral comments and submission of written comments, see Unit I.C.
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Nominations: Nominations of scientific experts to serve as ad hoc
members of the FIFRA SAP for this meeting should be provided on or
before February 13, 2006.
    Special accommodations: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, and to request accommodation of a
disability, please contact the Designated Federal Official (DFO) listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least 10 business days prior
to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your
request.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn Rosslyn at Key
Bridge, 1900 North Fort Myer Drive, Arlington, VA 22209. The telephone
number for the Holiday Inn Rosslyn at Key Bridge is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0471, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch
(PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
     Hand Delivery: Public Information and Records Integrity
Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801
S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0471. The docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
docket facility is<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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 number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0471. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line
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 regulations.gov or e-
mail. The 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 regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be captured automatically 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/docket.htm/.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
regulation.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., 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 at
http://www.regulations.gov/ or in hard copy at the Public Information

and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. The docket facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the docket facility is (703) 305-
5805.
    Nominations, requests to present oral comments, and special
accommodations: See Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrta R. Christian, DFO, Office of
Science Coordination and Policy (7201M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to persons who are or may be required to
conduct testing of chemical substances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), FIFRA, and the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the DFO
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

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

    When preparing and submitting comments, remember to use these tips:
    1. Identify the document by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading,Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions. The agency 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.

C. How May I Participate in this Meeting?

    You may participate in this meeting by following the instructions
in this unit. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that
you identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0471 in the subject line
on the first page of your request.
    1. Oral comments. Oral comments presented at the meetings should
not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written comments.
Although requests to present oral comments are accepted until the date
of the meeting (unless otherwise stated), to the extent that time
permits, interested persons may be permitted by the Chair of FIFRA SAP
to present oral comments at the meeting. Each individual or group
wishing to make brief oral comments to FIFRA SAP is strongly advised to
submit their request to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT no later than noon, eastern time, March 28, 2006, in order to
be included on the meeting agenda. The request should identify the name
of the individual making the presentation, the organization (if any)
the individual will represent, and any requirements for audiovisual
equipment (e.g., overhead projector, 35 mm projector, chalkboard). Oral
comments before FIFRA SAP are limited to approximately 5 minutes unless
prior arrangements have been made. In addition, each speaker should
bring 30 copies of his or her comments and presentation slides for
distribution to FIFRA SAP at the meeting.
    2. Written comments. Although written comments will be accepted
until the date of the meeting (unless otherwise stated), the Agency
encourages that written comments be submitted, using the instructions
in ADDRESSES, no later than noon, eastern time, March 21, 2006, to
provide FIFRA SAP the time necessary to consider and review the written
comments. It is requested that persons submitting comments directly to
the docket also notify the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. There is no limit on the extent of written comments for
consideration by FIFRA SAP. Persons wishing to submit written comments
at the meeting should bring 30 copies.
    3. Seating at the meeting. Seating at the meeting will be on a
first-come basis. Individuals requiring special accommodations at this
meeting, including wheelchair access and assistance for the hearing
impaired, should contact the DFO at least 10 business days prior to the
meeting using the information under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT so
that appropriate arrangements can be made.
    4. Request for nominations of prospective candidates for service as
ad hoc members of the FIFRA SAP for this meeting. As part of a broader
process for developing a pool of candidates for each meeting, the FIFRA
SAP staff routinely solicit the stakeholder community for nominations
of prospective candidates for service as ad hoc members of the FIFRA
SAP. Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified
individuals to be considered as prospective candidates for a specific
meeting. Individuals nominated for this meeting should have expertise
in one or more of the following areas: Occupational exposure
assessment, occupational exposure monitoring, agricultural practices
(especially hand labor practices), statistics, and risk assessment.
Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient professional
qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of
providing expert comments on the scientific issues for this meeting.
Nominees should be identified by name, occupation, position, address,
and telephone number. Nominations should be provided to the DFO listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before [insert date 12 days
after date of publication in the Federal Register]. The Agency will
consider all nominations of prospective candidates for this meeting
that are received on or before this date. However, final selection of
ad hoc members for this meeting is a discretionary function of the
Agency.
    The selection of scientists to serve on the FIFRA SAP is based on
the function of the panel and the expertise needed to address the
Agency's charge to the panel. No interested scientists shall be
ineligible to serve by reason of their membership on any other advisory
committee to a Federal department or agency or their employment by a
Federal department or agency (except the EPA). Other factors considered
during the selection process include availability of the potential
panel member to fully participate in the panel's reviews, absence of
any conflicts of interest or appearance of lack of impartiality,
independence with respect to the matters under review, and lack of
bias. Though financial conflicts of interest, the appearance of lack of
impartiality, lack of independence, and bias may result in
disqualification, the absence of such concerns does not assure that a
candidate will be selected to serve on the FIFRA SAP. Numerous
qualified candidates are identified for each panel. Therefore,
selection decisions involve carefully weighing a number of factors
including the candidates' areas of expertise and professional
qualifications and achieving an overall balance of different scientific
perspectives on the panel. In order to have the collective breadth of
experience needed to address the Agency's charge for this meeting, the
Agency anticipates selecting approximately 12 ad hoc scientists.
    If a prospective candidate for service on the FIFRA SAP is
considered for participation in a particular session, the candidate is
subject to the provisions of 5 CFR part 2634, Executive Branch
Financial Disclosure, as supplemented by the EPA in 5 CFR part 6401. As
such, the FIFRA SAP candidate is required to submit a Confidential
Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on
Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA Form 3110-48 5-02) which shall fully disclose, among other
financial interests, the candidate's employment, stocks and bonds, and
where applicable, sources of research support. The EPA will evaluate
the candidate's financial disclosure form to assess that there are no
financial conflicts of interest, no appearance of lack of impartiality
and no prior involvement with the development of the documents under
consideration (including previous scientific peer review) before the
candidate is considered further for service on the FIFRA SAP.
    Those who are selected from the pool of prospective candidates will
be asked to attend the public meetings and to participate in the
discussion of key issues and assumptions at these meetings. In
addition, they will be asked to review and to help finalize the meeting
minutes. The list of FIFRA SAP members participating at this meeting
will be posted on the FIFRA SAP web site or may be obtained by
contacting the PIRIB at the address or telephone number listed under
ADDRESSES.

II. Background

A. Purpose of the FIFRA SAP

    Amendments to FIFRA enacted November 28, 1975 (7 U.S.C. 136w(d)),
include a requirement under section 25(d) of FIFRA that notices of
intent to cancel or reclassify pesticide registrations pursuant to
section 6(b)(2) of FIFRA, as well as proposed and final forms of
regulations pursuant to section 25(a) of FIFRA, be submitted to a SAP
prior to being made public or issued to

a registrant. In accordance with section 25(d) of FIFRA, the FIFRA SAP
is to have an opportunity to comment on the health and environmental
impact of such actions. The FIFRA SAP also shall make comments,
evaluations, and recommendations for operating guidelines to improve
the effectiveness and quality of analyses made by Agency scientists.
Members are scientists who have sufficient professional qualifications,
including training and experience, to be capable of providing expert
comments as to the impact on health and the environment of regulatory
actions under sections 6(b) and 25(a) of FIFRA. The Deputy
Administrator appoints seven individuals to serve on the FIFRA SAP for
staggered terms of 4 years, based on recommendations from the National
Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
    Section 104 of FQPA (Public Law 104-170) established the FQPA
Science Review Board (SRB). These scientists shall be available to the
FIFRA SAP on an ad hoc basis to assist in reviews conducted by the
FIFRA SAP.

B. Public Meeting

    The FIFRA SAP will meet to consider the Review of Worker Exposure
Assessment Methods. The Agency issued its first occupational exposure
testing guidelines in the early 1980s. These guidelines were intended
to standardize the methodology used to conduct the studies necessary to
allow the Agency to determine the potential exposures, and
consequently, risks associated with the activities surrounding
pesticide exposures. These activities included handling pesticides
(i.e., mixing, loading and applying) as well as exposures resulting
from working in fields following pesticide applications (e.g.,
harvesting, thinning, weeding). In the early 1990s, the Pesticide
Handlers Exposure Database was constructed in order to estimate
exposures resulting from mixing/loading/applying pesticides. The
studies assembled for use in this database were taken from published
literature as well as from industry-generated studies. This database
has been used as the main source for estimating occupational exposures
to workers handling pesticides for both registration and reregistration
actions. In 1995, in order to develop a similar database, which could
be used to address fieldworker exposures, the Agency issued a Data
Call-In Notice (DCI) for post-application farmworker exposure data. As
a result of this DCI, every pesticide registrant who manufactured
products that could lead to post-application farmworker exposures
needed to generate data that could be used to quantify exposures to
their products.
    In response to the issuance of the 1995 DCI, most major pesticide
registrants consolidated their efforts and formed the Agricultural
Reentry Task Force (ARTF). For more details, see http://www.exposuretf.com.
 The ARTF has generated the vast majority of the

post-application farmworker exposure monitoring data since that time.
It follows that the bulk of the data that have been generated by ARTF
include exposure monitoring studies for a variety of hand-labor
practices in a range of crops.
    The purpose of this meeting of the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel
(SAP) is to evaluate certain methodologies used to generate exposure
studies and how the Agency uses these and other studies to conduct
occupational exposure assessments. Three key issues have been
identified by the Agency as the focus of this review. These include:
     Hand exposure methods. Based upon review of the data, it
appears that the hands are important contributors to overall exposures
levels. In most monitoring studies used by the Agency, a wash
technique, which is based on methods described in the scientific
literature, is generally utilized to measure exposure to the hands. The
goal of this evaluation is to identify issues associated with the use
of this technique and to make recommendations with regard to how these
data should be interpreted for exposure assessment purposes based on
factors such as chemical properties and exposure duration.
     Predictive capability of exposure monitoring techniques.
Most exposure data that are currently available are based on the use of
passive dosimetry techniques (e.g., whole-body dosimeters and
handwash). These data quantify the residues that result on the surface
of the skin after completing a job task of some sort. The purpose of
this evaluation is to characterize the performance of passive dosimetry
as a predictive tool for risk assessment purposes (e.g., through
comparison with biological monitoring data and other possible
analyses).
     Clustering of hand labor tasks for exposure assessment
purposes. The crops in the United States that require hand labor for
successful production are extremely varied and range from field crops
such as lettuce (e.g., harvest is a key labor requirement) to tree
fruit such as apples (e.g., thinning and harvest are key labor
requirements). Based on the currently available data and a need to
address exposures related to hand labor across agriculture, the Agency
has created clusters or groups that represent categories of exposures
that are believed to be similar for assessment purposes. These
categories allow the Agency to develop risk estimates for a wide range
of crops and were defined based on agronomic and ergonomic similarities
in crops and workers, respectively. The purpose of this evaluation is
to characterize the methods used to define a representative cluster and
analyze the monitoring data that pertains to that group, which are then
used for exposure assessment purposes. An example based on vineyard and
trellis crops will be used for illustrative purposes.

C. FIFRA SAP Documents and Meeting Minutes

    EPA's position paper, charge/questions to FIFRA SAP, FIFRA SAP
composition (i.e., members and consultants for this meeting), and the
meeting agenda will be available by March 2006. In addition, the Agency
may provide additional background documents as the materials become
available. You may obtain electronic copies of these documents, and
certain other related documents that might be available electronically,
from the regulation.gov Web site and the FIFRA SAP homepage at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap
.

    The FIFRA SAP will prepare meeting minutes summarizing its
recommendations to the Agency in approximately 90 days after the
meeting. The meeting minutes will be posted on the FIFRA SAP web site
or may be obtained by contacting the PIRIB at the address or telephone
number listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: January 24, 2006.
Clifford J. Gabriel,
Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy.
[FR Doc. E6-1106 Filed 1-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S