[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 183 (Friday, September 20, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49462-49465]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19992]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0452; FRL-9999-85-OAR]

Findings of Failure To Submit State Implementation Plans Required
for Attainment of the 2010 1-Hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to find that two states (Maryland and Michigan) failed to submit
State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to satisfy certain nonattainment area
planning requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2010 1-hour
primary Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). The purpose for the development and implementation of
nonattainment area SIPs is to provide for attainment of the NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable following the designation of an area as
nonattainment. This action establishes certain CAA deadlines for the
EPA to impose sanctions if a state does not submit a complete SIP
addressing the outstanding requirements and for the EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address any outstanding SIP
requirements.

DATES: This action is effective on October 21, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General questions concerning this
document should be addressed to Dr. Larry D. Wallace, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, Mail Code:
C539-01, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; by
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)

    Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when
an

agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for
making this final agency action without prior proposal and opportunity
for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making
findings of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by
the CAA, where states have made no submission to meet the requirement.
Thus, notice and public procedures are unnecessary to take this action.
The EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B).

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0452. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, William Jefferson
Clinton Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 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<PHONE_NUMBER> and the telephone number for the
Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-
1742.

C. Where do I go if I have a specific state questions?

    For questions related to specific states mentioned in this
document, please contact the appropriate EPA Regional Office:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Regional offices                          States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Region 3: Ms. Susan Spielberger,         Maryland.
 Associate Director, Office of Air Program
 Planning, EPA Region III, 1650 Arch
 Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2187.
EPA Region 5: Mr. Douglas Aburano, Chief,    Michigan.
 Attainment Planning and Maintenance
 Section, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region
 V, 77 West Jackson Street, Chicago, IL
 60604.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. How is the preamble organized?

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)
    B. How can I get copies of this document and other related
information?
    C. Where do I go if I have specific state questions?
    D. How is the preamble organized?
II. Background
III. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit
IV. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make a
Nonattainment Area SIP Submittal
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority and Low Income Populations
    L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
    M. Judicial Review

II. Background

    In June 2010, the EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is met when
the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-
hour average concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb, as determined in
accordance with Appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. See 40 CFR 50.17(a)-(b).
On July 12, 2016, the EPA, as part of the second round of area
designations for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, designated four areas
of the country as nonattainment for the 1-hour primary 2010
SO2 NAAQS.\1\ See 81 FR 45039, codified at 40 CFR part 81,
subpart C. These area designations had an effective date of September
12, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA completed its first round of initial area
designations for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS on
August 5, 2013, with an effective date of October 4, 2013. Under a
court order issued on March 2, 2015, the EPA is required to complete
designations related to the remaining undesignated areas of the
country by no later than December 31, 2020. The findings in this
document apply only to those areas that were designated on July 12,
2016, and where, as of signature of this action, the affected states
failed to submit required complete plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Areas designated as nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS are
subject to the general nonattainment area planning requirements of CAA
section 172 and to the SO2-specific planning requirements of
subpart 5 of part D of Title I of the CAA (sections 191 and 192). All
components of the SO2 part D nonattainment area SIP,
including the emissions inventory, attainment demonstration, reasonably
available control measures (RACM) including reasonably available
control technology (RACT), enforceable emission limitations and control
measures, reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, nonattainment new
source review (NNSR), and contingency measures, are due to the EPA
within 18 months of the effective date of designation of an area under
CAA section 191. Thus, the nonattainment area SIPs for areas designated
effective September 12, 2016, were due on March 12, 2018. These SIPs
were required to demonstrate that their respective areas will attain
the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years
from the effective date of designation, or by September 12, 2021.

III. Consequences of Findings of Failure To Submit

    If the EPA finds that a state has failed to make the required SIP
submittal or that a submitted SIP is incomplete, then CAA section
179(a) establishes specific consequences, including the imposition of
mandatory sanctions for the affected area, after a period of time.
Additionally, such a finding also triggers an obligation under CAA
section 110(c) for the EPA to promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years
after the finding of failure to submit if the affected state has not
submitted, and EPA has not approved, the required SIP submittal.
    If the EPA has not affirmatively determined that a state has made
the required complete SIP submittal for an area within 18 months of the
effective date of this rulemaking, then, pursuant to CAA section 179(a)
and (b) and 40 CFR 52.31, the offset sanction identified in CAA section
179(b)(2) will apply in the affected nonattainment area. If the EPA has
not affirmatively determined that the state has made a complete
submission within 6 months after the offset sanction is imposed, then
the highway funding sanction will apply in the affected nonattainment
area, in accordance with CAA section 179(b)(1) and 40 CFR 52.31. The
sanctions will not take effect if, within 18 months after the date of
these findings, the EPA affirmatively determines that the affected
state has made a complete SIP submittal addressing the deficiency for
which the finding was made. Additionally, if the state makes the

required SIP submittal and the EPA takes final action to approve the
submittal within 2 years of the effective date of these findings, the
EPA is not required to promulgate a FIP for the affected nonattainment
area.

IV. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make a
Nonattainment Area SIP Submittal

    As of the date of signature of this action, the two states listed
in Table 1 failed to make complete SIP submittals required under part D
of Title 1 of the CAA by March 12, 2018, for two areas designated
nonattainment effective September 12, 2016.\2\ The EPA is, therefore,
issuing findings of failure to submit for the two states responsible
for these areas: Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County, Maryland,
and St. Clair, Michigan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The EPA is not including in this action findings of failure
to submit for the two other areas designated nonattainment effective
September 12, 2016: Alton Township, Illinois, and Williamson County,
Illinois. With respect to the first area, the state of Illinois
submitted a SIP for the Alton Township, Illinois, nonattainment area
on December 3, 2018, which was deemed complete on June 5, 2019. See
letter from Edward Nam, Director, Air and Radiation Division, to Mr.
John Kim, Director, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (June
5, 2019) (included in the rulemaking docket for this final action).
With respect to the second area, on September 5, 2019, the EPA
Administrator signed a notice of final action titled,
``Reconsideration of the Area Designation for the 2010 1-Hour Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standard for Williamson County, Illinois; Final Rule.'' This final
action changes the initial designation of Williamson County,
Illinois, from nonattainment to attainment/unclassifiable, and will
be codified at 40 CFR 81.314. The EPA will promptly transmit this
signed final action to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication. An unofficial copy of the pre-publication signed final
action is available at https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/reconsideration-nonattainment-designation-williamson-co-illinois. Only the version of the signed final action published
in the Federal Register will be the official version, and it will
identify the effective date of the change in designation of
Williamson County, Illinois.

  Table 1--States and 2010 1-Hour Primary SO2 NAAQS Nonattainment Areas
             Affected by These Findings of Failure To Submit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Regional office               State          Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region III....................  Maryland.........  Anne Arundel County
                                                    and Baltimore
                                                    County.
Region V......................  Michigan.........  St. Clair.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Environmental Justice Considerations

    The EPA believes that the human health or environmental risks
addressed by this action will not have disproportionately high or
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment under the
SO2 NAAQS. The purpose of this rule is to make findings that
the states named in this final action failed to submit the required
SIPs to provide for timely attainment of the 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS, which will result in certain CAA-required
deadlines for actions to provide for such attainment. In finding that
certain states failed to submit a complete SIP that satisfies the
nonattainment area plan requirements under section 172 and subpart 5 of
part D of Title I of the CAA (sections 191 and 192) for the 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS, this action does not adversely affect the
level of protection provided for human health or the environment.
Rather, it is intended that the actions and deadlines resulting from
this notice will in fact lead to greater protection for United States
citizens, including minority, low-income, or indigenous populations, by
ensuring that states meet their statutory obligation to develop and
submit SIPs to ensure that areas make progress toward attaining the 1-
hour primary SO2 NAAQS.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive Order
13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because it finds that two states failed to meet the requirement in the
CAA to submit SIPs under section 172 and subpart 5 of part D of Title I
of the CAA (sections 191 and 192) for the SO2 NAAQS.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act. This final rule does not
establish any new information collection requirement apart from what is
already required by law. This rule relates to the requirement in the
CAA for states to submit SIPs under section 172 and subpart 5 of part D
of Title I of the CAA (sections 191 and 192) which address the
statutory requirements that apply to areas designated as nonattainment
for the SO2 NAAQS.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. The rule is
a finding that the named states have not made the necessary SIP
submission for certain nonattainment areas to meet the requirements of
part D of title I of the CAA.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This rule finds that two states have failed to
complete the requirement in the CAA to submit SIPs

under section 172 and subpart 5 of part D of Title I of the CAA
(sections 191 and 192) for the SO2 NAAQS. No tribe is
subject to the requirement to submit an implementation plan under
section 172 or under subpart 5 of part D of Title I of the CAA. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the
definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is a finding that certain states have failed to submit a
complete SIP that satisfies the nonattainment area plan requirements
under section 172 and subpart 5 of part D of Title I of the CAA and
does not directly or disproportionately affect children.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations. In finding that certain states have failed
to submit a complete SIP that satisfies the nonattainment area planning
requirements under section 172 and subpart 5 of part D of Title I of
the CAA, this action does not adversely affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the environment.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

M. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(l) of the CAA indicates which federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final agency actions by
the EPA under the CAA. This section provides, in part, that petitions
for review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (i) when the agency action consists of ``nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or final actions taken, by the
Administrator,'' or (ii) when such action is locally or regionally
applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds
and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.''
    The EPA has determined that this final rule consisting of findings
of failure to submit certain required SIP provisions for two
nonattainment areas for the 2010 primary 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is
``nationally applicable'' and that it is ``of nationwide scope and
effect'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). This final agency
action affects two nonattainment areas that are located in two states,
residing in two of the ten EPA Regional Offices and covered by two
different federal judicial circuits. In addition, the rule addresses a
common core of knowledge and analysis involved in formulating the
decision and a common interpretation of the requirements of 40 CFR 51
appendix V applied to determining the completeness of SIPs in states
across the country.
    This determination is appropriate because in the 1977 CAA
Amendments that revised CAA section 307(b)(l), Congress noted that the
Administrator's determination that an action is of ``nationwide scope
or effect'' would be appropriate for any action that has ``scope or
effect beyond a single judicial circuit.'' H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at 323-
324, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. Here, the scope and effect
of this action extends to the two judicial circuits that include the
two states affected by this action. In these circumstances, CAA section
307(b)(1) and its legislative history authorize the Administrator to
find the rule to be of ``nationwide scope or effect'' and thus to
indicate that venue for challenges lies in the D.C. Circuit.
Accordingly, the EPA is determining that this is a rule of nationwide
scope or effect. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the
date this final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action
does not affect the finality of the action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. Thus, any petitions for review of this action must be
filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
within 60 days from the date this final action is published in the
Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Approval and promulgation of implementation
plans, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, and
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 9, 2019.
Anne L. Idsal,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-19992 Filed 9-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Reader’s Guide for Propionic Acid and Salts

CRM: Wilhelmena Livingston

EPA/OPPTS/OPP/SRRD

Reader’s Guide to Propionic Acid and Salts Docket #
EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0024

Publication Date: March 26, 2008

	EPA has created this document to provide an organizational structure to
the Registration Review Propionic Acid and Salts Docket for Public
Comments.  The docket index groups related documents.  The first group
contains the Federal Register and Docket Organizational Documents, the
second group contains the Human Health Assessment, the third group
contains the Environmental Risk Assessment documents, and the fourth
group contains use/usage information and other information pertaining to
the propionic acid and salts registration review.   The Agency is
providing the “Reader’s Guide” to allow the reader to more easily
access and navigate the various items contained in the propionic acid
and salts docket.

Federal Register and Docket Organizational Documents:

Docket Item 1.	Federal Register Notice:  Propionc Acid and Salts
Registration 				Review

Docket Item 2.	Reader’s Guide to the Propionic Acid and Salts Docket #
EPA-        			HQ-OPP-2008-0024

Docket Item 3.	Propionic Acid and Salts Summary Document

Human Health Documents for Registration Review

Docket Item 4.	Propionic Acid:  Health Effects Division (HED) Problem
		Formulation for Registration Review.  DP# 344575

			(November 20, 2007)

This document describes the scope of work necessary to support the
registration review.

Docket Item 5.	Propionic Acid:  HED Science Assessment for Tolerance
	Reassessment Eligibility Decision

			(February 14, 2002)

This document addresses possible exposures to residues of propionic acid
in food, drinking water, and from residential sources, and makes a
conclusion in the tolerance reassessment of propionic acid.

Environmental Fate and Effects Documents for Registration Review

Docket Item 6.	Registration Review – Preliminary Problem Formulation
for the 				Ecological Risk Assessment of Propionic Acid.

			(December 17, 2007)

This document describes the ecological risk problem formulation.

Docket Item 7.	Review of Propionic Acid, as Active and Inert Ingredient

			(October 19, 2001)

This document addresses the tolerance reassessment eligibility decision
for the active ingredient propionic acid and propionic acid as an inert
ingredient in formulations.

Use and Usage Information for Registration Review

Docket Item 8.	Propionic Acid Screening-Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)

			(September 27, 2007)

This document provides the available estimates of pesticide usage data
for propionic acid that is used on agricultural crops in the United
States.

Docket Item 9.	Propionic Acid Appendix A

			(October 3, 2007)

This table list the food/feed and non-food/non-feed uses eligible for
reregistration

Docket Item 10.	Propionic Acid Registrations

This document lists the pending and active registrations for propionic
acid.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 164 (Thursday, August 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52357-52358]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18319]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2022 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1007; Airspace Docket No. 22-ACE-17]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Independence and
Pittsburg, KS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace at
Independence and Pittsburg, KS. The FAA is proposing this action as the
result of an airspace review as part of the decommissioning of the
Oswego very high frequency (VHF) omnidirectional range (VOR) as part of
the VOR Minimal Operational Network (MON) Program. The geographic
coordinates of the airports would also be updated to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 11, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-1007/Airspace Docket No. 22-ACE-17 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the
proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in
the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Independence Municipal Airport, Independence, KS,
and Atkinson Municipal Airport, Pittsburg, KS, to support instrument
flight rule operations at these airports.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2022-1007/
Airspace Docket No. 22-ACE-17.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ``ADDRESSES'' section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective
September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by:
    Amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface within a 6.6-mile (decreased

from a 7.6-mile) radius of Independence Municipal Airport,
Independence, KS; and updating geographic coordinates of the airport to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database;
    And amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Atkinson Municipal Airport, Pittsburgh, KS, by
updating the geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database; and removing the city associated with the
airport in the header of the airspace legal description to comply with
FAA Order JO 7400.2N, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.
    This action is necessary due to an airspace review as part of the
decommissioning of the Oswego VOR, which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures this airport, as part of the
VOR MON Program.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ACE KS E5 Independence, KS [Amended]

Independence Municipal Airport, KS
    (Lat. 37[deg]09'29'' N, long. 95[deg]46'44'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Independence Municipal Airport.
* * * * *

ACE KS E5 Pittsburg, KS [Amended]

Atkinson Municipal Airport, KS
    (Lat. 37[deg]27'00'' N, long. 94[deg]43'52'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Atkinson Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 22, 2022.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2022-18319 Filed 8-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


1 SF 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL EMISSIONS STANDARDS For Coke Oven Batteries 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L [ OMB No. 2060 0253; EPA No. 1362.04]

1. Identification of the Information Collection 1( a) Title of the Information Collection ICR for The National Emissions Standards for Coke Oven Batteries, 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L.

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The National Emissions Standards for Coke Oven Batteries were proposed on December 4, 1992 and promulgated on October 27, 1993. These standards apply to all coke oven batteries, whether existing, new, reconstructed, rebuilt or restarted. It also applies to all batteries using the conventional by product recovery, the nonrecovery process, or any new recovery process. Under this rule, all existing batteries must choose a compliance track. Three compliance approaches are available under the rule: the " MACT ( Maximum Achievable Control Technology) track," the " LAER ( Lowest Achievable Emission Rate) extension track," and straddling both tracks ( until January 1, 1998).

Applicability dates vary depending on the emission limitation the affected facility 2 is subject to. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L.

Owners or operators of coke oven batteries, whether existing, new, reconstructed,

rebuilt or restarted, are required to comply with monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

Owners or operators of the affected facilities described must make one time only notifications to elect a compliance track and to certify initial compliance. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Monitoring requirements specific to coke oven batteries provide information on the operation of the emissions control device and compliance with the visible emissions standard. Semiannual reports of compliance certifications are required. These notifications, reports, and records will be used by EPA and states to: 1) identify batteries subject to the standards; 2) ensure that MACT and LAER are properly applied; and 3) ensure that daily monitoring and work practice requirements are implemented as required.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least one year following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records, and must thereafter be accessible within three working days.

According to data gathered by the Office of Air Quality and Standrds, there are approximately 68 coke batteries (" affected facilities) operated by 35 coke plants ( 14 iron 3 and steel producers and 11 merchant coke producers) nationwide. We are assuming that each plant has coke batteries subject to this regulation. It is estimated that no additional plants per year will become subject to the standard in the next three years. Particulate matter is the pollutant regulated under this Subpart. The cost of this ICR will be 5,644,998 dollars.

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 EPA Regional Office.

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 or 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 or methods ( in accordance with such methods at such locations, at such intervals, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe), and ( D) sample such emissions, ( E) keep records on 4 control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical, ( F) submit compliance certifications, and ( G)

provide such other information as he may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, particulate matter emissions from coke batteries at coke plants cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, NESHAP were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L.

2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/ USERS OF THE DATA The control of emissions of particulate matter from coke batteries at coke plants requires not only the installation of properly designed equipment, but also the operation and maintenance of that equipment. Emissions of particulate matter from coke plants are the result of operation of the coke batteries. These standards rely on both the capture and reduction of particulate matter emissions by establishing emission limitations for doors,

lids, offtakes, and charging operations on coke ovens with or without sheds ( for the capture of emissions); use of an emissions control device; and by establishing control measures and monitoring requirements for bypass/ bleeder stacks and collecting mains.

The required notifications are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the standard. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated, leaks are being detected and repaired, and the standard is being met. Initial compliance reports and performance test reports are needed as these are the Agency's record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standard, and serve as a record of the 5 operating conditions under which compliance was achieved. The semiannual compliance certifications are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. The information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NESHAP continue to operate the control equipment and achieve compliance with the regulation. Adequate monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting is necessary to ensure compliance with these standards, as required by the Clean Air Act. The information collected from recordkeeping and reporting requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria 3( a) Nonduplication The recordkeeping and reporting requested is required under 40 CFR Part 63,

Subpart L. If the standard has not been delegated the information is sent 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 their own similar regulation to implement the Federal Regulation, 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 Standard. 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 on August 16, 1999. 6 3( c) Consultations No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the required standards. Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and 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 the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 63,

Subpart L or otherwise pertinent to this request violate any of the regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.6.

3( f) Confidentiality The required information consists of emissions data and other information that have been determined not to be private. However, 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). 7 3( g) Sensitive Questions None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 63,

Subpart L or otherwise pertinent to this request contain sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes The respondents of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are owners or operators of all coke oven batteries, whether existing, new, reconstructed, rebuild or restarted. A new or a greenfield ( constructed at a new plant where no batteries previously existed) by product battery is one constructed or reconstructed on or after December 4, 1992. A brownfield battery ( new construction without an increase in the coke plant capacity as of November 15, 1990) or a rebuilt battery ( i. e., a padup rebuild battery is an existing battery completely reconstructed on or after December 4, 1992, on the same site and pad that does not result in an increase of the design capacity of the coke plant as of November 15, 1990. Coke oven batteries are listed under SIC Code SIC 3312,

Steel Works, Blast Furnaces ( including coke ovens) and Rolling Mills. The Federal government is in the process of transitioning to the new North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS). The NAICS code( s) for this industry are NAIC 331111,

Iron and Steel Mills; and NAIC 324199, All Other Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing ( i. e., coke ovens, not integrated with steel mills).

4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED ( i) Data Items 8 All data in this ICR that is recorded and/ or reported is required by 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L, National Emission Standards for Coke Oven Batteries.

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports Intention to construct a new, brownfield, or padup rebuild coke oven battery, including anticipated date of startup. 63.311( c)( 1),

63.5, 63.9( b)

Notification of compliance status when source becomes subject to the standard. 63.9( h),

63.311( c)( 2)

Notification that source is subject to special compliance requirements: obtaining an exemption from control requirements for bypass\ bleeder stacks by committing to permanent closure of a battery or using an equivalent alternative control system for the stacks; and obtaining an alternative standard for coke oven doors on a battery equipped with a shed. 63.9( d)

Initial performance test. 63.7( b),

63.9( e)

Rescheduled initial performance test. 63.7( b)( 2) Notification Reports 9 Notification requirements for coke ovens with a shed using a continuous monitoring systems for opacity of emissions discharged from the emission control equipment; and meeting the alternative standard. 63.9( g),

63.305( f)( 4)

Demonstration of continuous monitoring system. 63.9( g)

Change in information already provided. 63.9( j)

Request for an extension of compliance with relevant standard. 63.9( c)

Reports Application for approval of the construction or reconstruction of a new major affected source, or reconstruction of a major affected source. 63.5( 6)( d),

63.9( b)( 1)( iiii)

Performance test results. 60.8 ( a), 61.13( f) , 63.10( d)( 2), 63.309 Report of opacity and visible emission observations. 63.9( f)

Emission control work practice plan for each coke oven battery. 63.306( a)

Opacity or visible emissions. 63.10( d)( 3)

Periodic startup, shutdown, malfunction reports. 63.10( d)( 5)( I)

Initial compliance certification. 63.9( h),

63.111( b)

Submit semiannual compliance certifications. 63.9( h),

63.311( d) Reports 10 Report for the venting of coke oven gas other than through a flare system. 63.311( e)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping Startup, shutdown, malfunction plan. 63.6( e)( 3),

63.1( b)( 2) ,

63.310,

63.311( f)( 6)

All reports and notifications. 63.10( b)( 1)

Any applicability determinations that demonstrate why owner or operator believes source( s) is unaffected. 63.10( b)( 3)

Copy of the coke oven emission control work practice plan and revisions, and records related to implementation of plan requirements. 63.306,

63.311( f)( 3 4)

For an approved alternative emission limitation: monitoring records of parameters that indicate the exhaust flow rate is maintained, records for the continuous opacity monitoring system, and quarterly visual inspection of the shed. 63.10( c),

63.311( f)( 2)

For the bypass/ bleeder stack flare system or an approved alternative control device: design of drawings and of engineering specifications. 63.311( f)( 5)

For nonrecovery coke oven batteries: records of daily operating parameters and design characteristics. 63.111( f)( 1) 11 Owners or operators shall maintain records onsite of all required information for at least one year. Records of the work practice plan; and of the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan shall be kept onsite at all times ( 63.111( f)). 12 ii. Respondent Activities:

Respondent Activities Read instructions.

Daily performance tests by a certified observer, commencing on the applicable date, using Method 303 or 303A for each new and existing coke oven battery are needed to determine compliance with the visible emission limitations for coke oven doors, topside port lids, offtake systems, and charging operations.

Develop and implement an emission control work practice plan for each coke oven battery.

For coke ovens equipped with sheds choosing to comply with an alternative to the emission limitation standards, submit an initial test plan, and once approved,

conduct an initial performance test using Methods 5 ( determine the efficiency of control equipment ), Method 9 ( measure opacity of emissions from control device), and Method 22 ( measure visible emissions that escape the shed) to get approval to use alternative standard.

For coke ovens equipped with sheds complying with the alternative standard,

conduct weekly performance tests using Method 303 to determine compliance;

and if the visible emission limitation is achieved for 12 consecutive observations,

then switch to monthly tests until an exceedance occurs, at which time the weekly tests shall be resumed.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate continuous monitoring system for opacity emissions discharged from the control system at coke oven doors equipped with sheds and complying with the alternative standard. Respondent Activities 13 For nonrecovery coke oven batteries, daily monitoring of pressure in oven or common tunnel to ensure a negative pressure; implement work practices requirement for charging operations at existing batteries; and install, operate and maintain control system for the capture and collection of emissions at new batteries.

For a by product recovery, a brownfield or padup rebuild coke oven battery,

install, operate and maintain a bypass/ bleeder stack flare system capable of controlling 120 percent of the normal gas flow generated by the battery; unless the owner or operator has been approved for an alternative control device or system that achieves at least 98 percent destruction or control of coke oven emissions.

For by product coke oven, daily inspection of the collecting main for leaks according to Method 303.

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.

Adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements. Respondent Activities 14 Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

Regulatory agencies, to the extent possible, are relying more on automated techniques such as electronic submissions of reports, and are improving their tracking systems and database systems to enhance the use of these techniques. In 1997, the EPA Office of Air Quality and Standards initiated efforts to allow companies to provide an electronic copy of their spreadsheets that contained the Method 303 inspection results so that EPA could develop a national database of the results of the visible emission inspections of coke oven batteries.

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 information required under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L:

Agency Activities Observe initial performance tests and daily performance tests by a certified observer,

commencing on the applicable date. Agency Activities 15 Review notifications and reports, including initial compliance certification, semiannual compliance certifications, performance test reports, report for the venting of coke oven gas other than through a flare system, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records: opacity or visible emissions data; periodic startup, shutdown,

malfunction reports; implementation of coke oven emission control work practice plan;

operating parameters and operations of control equipment.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS) database.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source's initial capability to comply with each of the applicable visible emissions for coke oven doors,

topside port lids, offtake systems, and charging operations in this subpart, and note the operating conditions under which compliance was achieved. Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs. The semiannual compliance certifications and daily performance tests 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 AIRS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. AIRS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance and annual emission inventory data for over 100,000 industrial and government owned facilities. EPA uses 16 AIRS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement activities by State and Local regulatory agencies, and EPA Regional Offices and 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 or operator for one year onsite, and thereafter be accessible within 3 working days.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility There are no small businesses affected by this standard.

5( d) Collection Schedule The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown on Table 1.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection Table 2 documents the computation of individual burdens for each of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry. 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. None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 63 or otherwise pertinent to this request violate any of the regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.6. 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 17 The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated at 104,659.98 person hours. These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents used in the development of the standard or test methods; Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program; the previously approved ICR; and new guidance associated from EPA's ICR lead contacts. The number of person hours in this ICR is significant higher thn the previous ICR because of a categorization change on burden. If the person hours calculated in the previous hours would have been determined in the same manner as with this ICR the increase reflected would have been less than 25 percent. The previous ICR had most of the person hours accounted under the annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden category. This is not the case in this ICR because it has been decided that the annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden category should include all the personhours required to comply with the rule requirements. In addition, there are no sources using continuous emission monitors for opacity emissions discharged from the control device and there will be no operating and maintenance associated with it. In general, the increase in person hours is due to more accurate estimates of the number of sources and the specific rule requirements.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Labor Costs This ICR uses loaded labor rates: Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor is $ 73.93 ($ 35.20 plus 110%); Technical labor is $ 54.94 ($ 26.16 plus 110%); and Clerical labor is $ 34.42 ($ 16.39 plus 110%). These rates 18 are from the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of Labor Statistics,

March 1999, Table 10: Employment Costs for Private Industry by Occupational and Industry Group. The rates are from column 1: Total compensation. The wage rates have been loaded by adding 110% overhead.

( ii) Estimating Capital and Operation and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the standards are labor only. The capital start up costs are one time costs when a facility becomes subject to the standard. There are no capital start up costs for this regulation. There are no annual operations and maintenance costs associated with continuos emissions monitors ( CEMs) since there are no sources using such equipment for opacity emissions discharged from the control device. Therefore, the average annual burden for capital and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is cero. .

( iii) Capital/ Start up vs. Operating and Maintenance Costs There are no coke oven batteries with sheds that have applied for an alternative standard which would have required them to use a CEM for opacity emissions discharged from the control device.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost The only Federal costs are user costs associated with analysis of the reported information. Publication and distribution of the information are part of the AIRS program.

Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur as part of the periodic inspection of sources, which is part of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program. 19 The average annual Federal Government cost during the 3 years of the ICR is estimated to be 56,697 dollars. This cost is based on an average wage of a GS 10 step 1 employee rate, $ 16.52 plus 110% overhead which equals $ 34.69. Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Agency Burden.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The number of existing sources ( i. e., coke oven batteries) subject to NESHAP,

Part 63, Subpart L is 68. The number of total respondents is 25. This is the number of existing respondents since there are no new respondents anticipated over the next three years. The total annual responses is 57.5. This number is calculated from the number of existing sources subject to notification requirements multiplied by the number of initial reports, plus the number of existing sources multiplied by the semiannual compliance certifications. The total annual labor costs are 5,644,997.8 dollars with no annual capital and O& M costs to the regulated entity. Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 1: Industry Burden.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours And Cost Tables Refer to Tables 1 and 2 in Attachment 1 for a detail description of the burden hours and associated cost.

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden The significant increase in burden associated with recordkeeping and reporting hour burden category and the annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden category of this ICR is due primarily to a change of burden categorization ( i. e., three categories were defined consistent with the rule) from the active ICR. For example, some requirements may apply to all plants, while some requirements may only apply to 20 non recovery plants or by product recovery plants. The increase in burden is also due to more accurate estimate of existing sources by category and a better understanding of the burden associated with the specific rule requirements by category. These adjustments resulted in a total burden increase.

6( g) Burden Statement 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 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden,

including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822), 12000 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D. C. 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 21 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the EPA ICR number and OMB control number in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 2. OMB control number b. None a. 2060 0482 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Request for Applications for Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide ( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 2031.02 9. Keywords agriculture, pesticides and pests, methyl bromide, critical use exemption, Montreal Protocol, Clean Air Act 10. Abstract EPA is seeking to renew the existing ICR in place for requesting applications from critical use exemptions for methyl bromide beyond the phaseout date of January 1, 2005, under the Clean Air Act ( CAA). Specifically, this ICR allows EPA to collect critical use exemption applications from regulated entities on an annual basis to develop a technically defensible U. S. Nomination submitted to the Ozone Secretariat of the United Nations Environment Programme, which is also required to be submitted on an annual basis. Notices published in the Federal Register invite users of methyl bromide to submit applications.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. P Farms b. X Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. X Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. X Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 100 b. Total annual responses 100 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically ____ 25 %______ c. Total hours requested ________ 5,000______ ICR d. Current OMB inventory 97,605 e. Difference ( 92,605) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 0 2. Adjustment ( 92,605) 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 0 c. Total annualized cost requested 0 d. Current OMB inventory $ 99 e. Difference ($ 99) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 0 2. Adjustment ($ 99)

15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. P Application for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. X Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. X Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. Q Other ( describe)

17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Marta Montoro Phone: 202 343 9321 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected' ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Doreen Sterling, Acting Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


February 13, 2013

MEMORANDUM: 2010-2011 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Data on HCFC-22 Production Byproducts

TO: Air Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0354

This memorandum includes data submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Subpart O of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (40 CFR Part 98). Subpart O covers HFC-23 emissions associated with HCFC-22 production. Specifically, the following processes are covered by this regulation:

   * Processes that produce HCFC - 22 (chlorodifluoromethane or CHClF2) using chloroform and hydrogen fluoride.     * HFC - 23 destruction processes located at HCFC - 22 production facilities.     * HFC - 23 destruction processes that destroy more than 2.14 metric tons of HFC - 23 per year and that are not located at HCFC - 22 production facilities.

Since there is no minimum production threshold, all HCFC-22 production processes in the U.S. (and therefore all U.S. producers of HCFC-22) are covered by Subpart O reporting.

Direct GHG Emissions of HFC-23 Reported by Facility in Metric Tons of CO2e                                    Facility                                      City                                      State                        Total Reported Emissions (MTCO2e)                                                                                2010                                      2011 DAIKIN AMERICA INC. DECATUR AL 5,324 4,809 DUPONT LOUISVILLE WORKS LOUISVILLE KY 3,265,138 4,710,701 DUPONT WASHINGTON WORKS WASHINGTON WV 16 66 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC - BATON ROUGE PLANT BATON ROUGE LA 3,081,312 2,213,055 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC - GEISMAR COMPLEX GEISMAR LA 7 5,370

Important Information about this Data Set    oo The data was reported to EPA by facilities as of 01/15/2013. EPA continues to quality assure data and may release updated data later.    oo Learn more about what is included in this data set and view related EPA GHG data sources at http://epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgdata/ghgdatasets.html.


[Federal Register: May 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 29328-29329]
[DOCID:fr22my06-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EL06-1-001, et al.]

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, et al.; Electric Rate and
Corporate Filings

May 12, 2006.
    The following filings have been made with the Commission. The
filings are listed in ascending order within each docket
classification.

1. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, A National Grid Company v. New
York State Reliability Council and New York Independent System
Operator, Inc.

[Docket No. EL06-1-001]

    Take notice that on April 28, 2006, New York State Reliability
Council (NYSRC) and New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO)
filed a joint informational report, pursuant to the Commission's order
issued February, 2, 2006, regarding actions taken by NYSRC and NYISO
concerning the progress they made toward resolving issues raised by the
Niagara Mohawk

Power Corporation in its complaint filing of September 30, 2005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 26, 2006.

2. Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership

[Docket No. ER06-733-001]

    Take notice that May 10, 2006, Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited
Partnership filed revised tariff sheets, Sub. Original Sheet Nos. 2
through 4 and Original Sheet No. 5, to its market-based tariff,
Original Volume No 1, pursuant to the Commission's May 8, 2006 request.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 22, 2006.

3. Arcadia Power Partners, LLC; Cleco Power LLC

[Docket Nos. ER06-964-000; ER06-965-000]

    Take notice that on May 5, 2006, Arcadia Power Partners, LLC filed
its proposed revised market-based rate tariff, Original Volume No. 1,
Original Sheet No. 3, to permit it to make sales of energy indirectly
through a non-affiliated marketer to its affiliate, Cleco Power LLC.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 19, 2006.

4. Colstrip Energy Limited Partnership

[Docket No. QF84-377-011]

    Take notice that on May 3, 2006, Colstrip Energy Limited
Partnership filed an application for recertification as a qualifying
small power production facility, pursuant to part 292, subpart B of the
Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 292.207(b).
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on June 2, 2006.

Standard Paragraph

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7755 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


16796 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 2003 / Notices 2.301( h)( 2)( ii). EPA Region 1 will require that each ASRC Aerospace Corporation employee sign a written agreement that he or she ( 1) will use the information only for the purpose of carrying out the work required by the contract, ( 2) shall refrain from disclosing the information to anyone other than EPA without the prior written approval of each affected business or of an EPA legal office, and ( 3) shall return to EPA all copies of the information ( and any abstracts or extracts therefrom) upon request from the EPA program office, whenever the information ( and any abstracts or extracts therefrom) upon request from the EPA program office, whenever the information is no longer required by ASRC Aerospace Corporation for performance of the work required by the contract, or upon completion of the contract. These non disclosure statements shall be maintained on file with the Region 1 Delivery Order Project Officer. ASRC Aerospace Corporation employees will be trained on Superfund CBI requirements. EPA hereby advises affected parties that they have ten working days to comment pursuant to 40 CFR 2.301( h)( 2)( iii).

Dated: March 20, 2003. Stanley D. Chin, Acting Director, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration, Region 1. [ FR Doc. 03   8368 Filed 4   4   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPP   2003   0112; FRL   7299   9]

The Association of American Pesticide Control Officials/ State FIFRA Issues Research and Evaluation Group; Working Committee on Water Quality and Pesticide Disposal; Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Association of American Pesticide Control Officials ( AAPCO)/ State FIFRA Issues Research and Evaluation Group ( SFIREG) Working Committee on Water Quality and Pesticide Disposal ( WC/ WQPD) will hold a 2   day meeting, beginning on April 28, 2003 and ending April 29, 2003. This notice announces the location and times for the meeting, and sets forth the tentative agenda topics. DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, April 28, 2003, from 8: 30 a. m. until 5 p. m., and April 29, 2003, from 8: 30 a. m. until noon. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Georgia McDuffie, Field and External Affairs Division ( 7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 605   0195; fax number: ( 703) 308   1850; email address: mcduffie. georgia@ epa. gov. Philip H. Gray, SFIREG Executive Secretary, P. O. Box 1249, Hardwick, VT 05843   1249; telephone number: ( 802) 472   6956; fax ( 802) 472   6957; e mail address: aapco@ plainfield. bypass. com. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are interested in SFIREG's information exchange relationship with EPA regarding important issues related to human health, environmental pesticides, and insight into EPA's decision making process. This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of particular interest to those persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA). 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 person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2003   0112. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA dockets. You may use EPA dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Tentative Agenda This unit provides tentative agenda topics for the 2   day meeting. 1. Atrazine Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( IRED) and Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU) with registrants. 2. Shallow ground water definition ( for precautionary label statements and directions). 3. Disposal Label Language Issue Team. 4. CCA cancellation update. 5. Association of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administration Project Report. 6. Registration mechanisms  review and discussion. 7. Water Quality Registration Issue Team  Approval of EPA operating procedure. 8. Membership recruiting discussion. 9. Planning for joint meeting with Working Committee on Pesticide Operations Management ( WC/ POM). 10. WQ/ PD Working Committee Workgroups/ Updates. 11. EPA update/ briefing. a. Office of Pesticide Programs update. b. Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance update.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticide pests.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 47 Apr 04, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 07APN1. SGM 07APN1 16797 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 66 / Monday, April 7, 2003 / Notices Dated: March 21, 2003. Jay Ellenberger, Associate Director, Field and External Affairs Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [ FR Doc. 03   8371 Filed 4   4   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection( s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission March 27, 2003. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection( s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104   13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning ( a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; ( b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ( c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and ( d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before June 6, 2003. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Les Smith, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1   A804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to Leslie. Smith@ fcc. gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies of the information collection( s) contact Les Smith at 202   418   0217 or via the Internet at leslie. Smith@ fcc. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 3060   0748. Title: Section 64.1504, Disclosure Requirements for Information Services Provided Through Toll Free Numbers. Form Number: N/ A. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities. Number of Respondents: 3,750. Estimated Time per Response: 2   5 hours. Frequency of Response: Third party disclosure. Total Annual Burden: 10,500 hours. Total Annual Cost: None. Needs and Uses: 47 CFR section 64.1504 incorporates in the Commission's Rules, the requirements of sections 228( c)( 7)   ( 10) that restrict the manner in which toll free numbers may be used to charge telephone subscribers for information services. Common carriers must prohibit the use of toll free numbers in a manner that would result in the calling party being charged for information conveyed during the call, unless the calling party ( 1) has executed a written agreement that specifies the material terms and conditions under which the information is provided, or ( 2) pays for the information by means of a prepaid account, credit, debit, charge, or calling card and the information service provider includes in response to each call an introductory message disclosing specified information detailing the cost and other terms and conditions for the service. The disclosure requirements are intended to ensure that consumers know when charges will be levied for calls to toll free numbers and are able to obtain information necessary to make informed choices about whether to purchase toll free information services. OMB Control No.: 3060   0749. Title: Section 64.1509, Disclosure and Dissemination of Pay Per Cal Information. Form Number: N/ A. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Business or other forprofit Number of Respondents: 25 respondents. Estimated Time per Response: 410 hours. Frequency of Responses: Annual and on occasion reporting requirements; Third party disclosure. Total Annual Burden: 10,250 hours ( multiple responses). Total Annual Cost: None. Needs and Uses: Common carriers that assign telephone numbers to payper call services must disclose to all interested parties, upon request, a list of all assigned pay per call numbers. For each assigned number, carriers must also make available ( 1) a description of the pay per call services; ( 2) the total cost per minute or other fees associated with the service; and ( 3) the service provider's name, business address, and telephone number. In addition, carriers handling pay per call services must establish a toll free number that consumers may call to receive information about pay per call services. Finally, the Commission requires carriers to provide statements of payper call rights and responsibilities to new telephone subscribers at the time service is established and, although not required by statute, to all subscribers annually. OMB Control Number: 3060   0752. Title: Section 64.1510, Billing Disclosure Requirements for Pay Per Call and Other Information Services. Form Number: N/ A. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities. Number of Respondents: 1,350. Estimated Time per Response: 10   40 hours. Frequency of Response: Annual reporting requirement; Third party disclosure. Total Annual Burden: 54, 000 hours. Total Annual Cost: None. Needs and Uses: Under 47 CFR Section 64.1510, telephone bills containing charges for interstate payper call and other information services must include information detailing consumers' rights and responsibilities with respect to these charges. Specifically, telephone bills carrying pay per call charges must include a consumer notification stating that ( 1) the charges are for non communication services; ( 2) local and long distance telephone services may not be disconnected for failure to pay per call charges; ( 3) pay per call ( 900 number) blocking is available upon request; and ( 4) access to pay per call services may be involuntarily blocked for failure to pay per call charges. In addition, each call billed must show the type of services, the amount of the charge, and the date, time, and duration of the call. Finally, the bill must display a toll free number which subscribers may call to obtain information about pay per call services. Similar billing disclosure requirements apply to charges for information services either billed to subscribers on a collect basis or accessed by subscribers through a tollfree number. The billing disclosure requirements are intended to ensure that VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 47 Apr 04, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 07APN1. SGM 07APN1


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61003-61004]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3091]

Advisory Committee; Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory
Committee; Renewal

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; renewal of advisory committee.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
renewal of the Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee by the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner). The Commissioner has
determined that it is in the public interest to renew the
Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee for an additional 2
years beyond the charter

expiration date. The new charter will be in effect until August 27,
2022.

DATES: Authority for the Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory
Committee will expire on August 27, 2022, unless the Commissioner
formally determines that renewal is in the public interest.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joyce Yu, Division of Advisory
Committee and Consultant Management, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
31, Rm. 2438, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 41 CFR 102-3, FDA is announcing the
renewal of the Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee
(Committee). The Committee is a discretionary Federal advisory
committee established to provide advice to the Commissioner or designee
in discharging responsibilities as they relate to helping to ensure
safe and effective drugs for human use and, as required, any other
product for which FDA has regulatory responsibility.
    The Committee reviews and evaluates available data concerning the
safety and effectiveness of marketed and investigational human drug
products for use in the treatment of cardiovascular and renal disorders
and makes appropriate recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and
Drugs.
    Under its Charter, the Committee shall consist of a core of 11
voting members including the Chair. Members and the Chair are selected
by the Commissioner or designee from among authorities knowledgeable in
the fields of cardiology, hypertension, arrhythmia, angina, congestive
heart failure, diuresis, and biostatistics. Members will be invited to
serve for overlapping terms of up to 4 years. Almost all non-Federal
members of this committee serve as Special Government Employees.
Federal members will serve as Regular Government Employees or Ex-
Officios. The core of voting members may include one technically
qualified member, selected by the Commissioner or designee, who is
identified with consumer interests and is recommended by either a
consortium of consumer-oriented organizations or other interested
persons. In addition to the voting members, the Committee may include
one non-voting member who is identified with industry interests. There
may also be alternate industry representative.
    Further information regarding the most recent charter and other
information can be found at https://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/cardiovascular-and-renal-drugs-advisory-committee/cardiovascular-and-renal-drugs-advisory-committee-charter or by contacting the Designated
Federal Officer (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In light of the
fact that no change has been made to the Committee name or description
of duties, no amendment will be made to 21 CFR 14.100.
    This document is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app.). For general information related to FDA advisory
committees, please check https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

    Dated: September 18, 2020.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-21465 Filed 9-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P