[Federal Register: October 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 209)]
[Notices]
[Page 63302-63304]
[DOCID:fr30oc06-73]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

October 24, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG07-5-000.
    Applicants: Holland Energy, LLC.
    Description: Holland Energy, LLC submits a notice of Self-
Recertification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.

    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061023-0124.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER97-4257-012.
    Applicants: Mid Power Service Corporation.
    Description: Mid-Power Service Corporation submits its Triennial
Revised Market Analyses for period ended 9/30/06, in compliance with
FERC's 9/30/97 Order.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061023-0088.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-3502-006.
    Applicants: Berkshire Power Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Berkshire Power Holdings, LLC submits a Notice of
Withdrawal of Application.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061018-5048.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-1919-009.
    Applicants: Exelon Energy Company.
    Description: Exelon Energy Company submits this modification to its
market-based tariff to delete the affiliate transactions provision
regarding Public Service Enterprise Group, Incorporated.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0220.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-881-004.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits a Large Generator Interconnection Agreement with Northern
States Power Company and Power Partners Midwest, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061019-0191.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1208-002.
    Applicants: Vermont Electric Power Company; Vermont Transco LLC.
    Description: Vermont Electric Power Co and Vermont Transco LLC
submit a withdrawal of its 9/20/06 filing of Certificates of
Concurrence to compliance with Commission Order issued 8/21/06.
    Filed Date: 10/16/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061019-0136.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 6, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1297-001.
    Applicants: Fox Energy Company LLC.
    Description: Fox Energy Company LLC submits its First Revised Sheet
1 to its FERC Electric Rate Schedule No. 2, effective 10/11/06.
    Filed Date: 10/13/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061016-0117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, November 3, 2006.
    Docket Numbers: ER06-1311-001.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. submits a Revised Market
Participant Service Agreement with Energy Spectrum, Inc.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1405-001.
    Applicants: Bangor Hydro-Electric Company.
    Description: Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. submits its Construction
Commitment Agreement with New Brunswick Power Transmission Corporation
designated as Original Service Agreement No. BHE-200, et al.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1457-001.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company; Kentucky Utilities
Company.
    Description: E. ON. U.S. LLC on behalf of Louisville Gas & Electric
et al. submits executed agreements with the Illinois Municipal Electric
Agency for firm point-to-point transmission service--Trimble County
Unit 1 and Unit 2.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0205.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1531-001.
    Applicants: Great Lakes Energy LLC.
    Description: Great Lakes Energy LLC submits an amendment to its
Original Petition for Acceptance of Initial Tariff, Waivers and Blanket
Authority.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0207.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1546-001.
    Applicants: Florida Power Corporation.
    Description: Florida Power Corporation submits correction to its 9/
29/06 filing to amend its Cost-Based Wholesale Power Sales Power Tarrif
and request for a shortened notice period.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 30, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-43-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Co. submits Notice of
Cancellation of the 1968 Purchase and Transmission Agreement with Yuma
Irrigation District.
    Filed Date: 10/17/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061018-0228.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 7, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-46-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: NorthWestern Corp. submits a change in rates for
transmission services under NorthWestern's Montana OATT, FERC Electric
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume 5, effective 12/18/06.
    Filed Date: 10/17/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0151.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 7, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-47-000.
    Applicants: PM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits its Interconnection
Service Agreement with Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC and Monongahela
Power Co. dba Allegheny Power.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061019-0199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-48-000.
    Applicants: Verde Renewable Energy, Inc.
    Description: Verde Renewable Energy, Inc. submits a Petition for
Acceptance of Initial Tariff, Waivers and Blanket Authority.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-49-000.
    Applicants: Northeast Utilities Service Company.
    Description: Northeast Utilities Service Company submits a Notice
of Cancellation of Public Service of New Hampshire Rate Schedule 150.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-50-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits its Facilities Construction Agreement with Great River Energy--
Generation.
    Filed Date: 10/20/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061023-0123.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 13, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES07-3-000.
    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.
    Description: MDU Resources Group, Inc. submits its Application for
authorization of the issuance of securities and authorization to engage
in methods of issuance other than competitive bidding and negotiated
offers.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-0222.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, November 8, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:
    Docket Numbers: PH06-109-001; PH06-110-001; PH06-111-001; PH06-112-
001; PH06-113-001; PH06-114-001.
    Applicants: Plainfield Direct Institutional Offshore Feeder Fund
Limited; Plainfield Direct Offshore Feeder Fund Limited; Plainfield
Direct Onshore Feeder Fund LP; Plainfield Special Situations
Institutional Offshore Feeder Fund Limited; Plainfield Special
Situations Offshore Feeder Fund Limited; Plainfield Special Situations
Onshore Feeder Fund LP.
    Description: Plainfield Direct Institutional Offshore, et al.
submit a Notice of Material Change in Facts.
    Filed Date: 10/10/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061010-5068.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 31, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: PH06-115-001.
    Applicants: D. E. Shaw & Co., II, Inc.
    Description: D. E. Shaw & Co. II, Inc. submits a Notice of Material
Change in Facts.
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061019-5044.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: PH07-1-000.
    Applicants: Central Vermont Power Service Corporation.
    Description: Central Vermont Power Service Corp. submits a Waiver
Notification pursuant to Section 366.3(c)(1).
    Filed Date: 10/19/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061019-5016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, November 9, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: PH07-2-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated.
    Description: Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated submits a
petition of waiver pursuant to sections 366.21, 366.22, and 366.23.
    Filed Date: 10/20/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061020-5070.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 13, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:
    Docket Numbers: RR06-1-003.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Council and North
American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: North American Electric Reliability Council and North
American Elec Reliability Corp submit a compliance filing addressing
non-governance issues.
    Filed Date: 10/18/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061018-5067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, November 17, 2006.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 dockets(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. E6-18139 Filed 10-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 202 (Friday, October 20, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48841-48842]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22747]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3389-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Alabama; Emergency and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice corrects the previous Federal Register notice of
an emergency declaration for the State of Alabama (FEMA-3389-EM), dated
September 11, 2017, and related determinations.

DATES: This correction was issued on October 11, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA previously published a Federal Register
notice on October 2, 2017 at 82 FR 45875 providing notice of a
Presidential declaration of an emergency for the State of Alabama. That
notice incorrectly stated that all 67 counties in the State of Alabama
and the Poarch Band of Creek Indians had been designated as eligible
for debris removal and emergency protective measures (Categories A and
B), including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance
program. The 67 counties in the State of Alabama and the Poarch Band of
Creek Indians are only designated as eligible for emergency protective
measures (Category B), including direct federal assistance, under the
Public Assistance program.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-22747 Filed 10-19-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 112 (Wednesday, June 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 33550]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13626]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0219; FRL-9911-66]

Pesticides; Consideration of Volatilization in Pesticide Risk
Assessment: Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; re-opening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the Federal Register issue of March 26,
2014, concerning the availability of several guidance documents for
public comment. This document reopens the comment period for 30 days.
The comment period is being reopened to provide additional time for
commenters to prepare their responses.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2014-0219, must be received on or before July 11, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of March 26, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Health Effects Division
(7509P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document reopens the public comment
period established in the Federal Register issue of March 26, 2014 (79
FR 16791) (FRL-9907-92), which requested comment on several draft
guidance documents. Additional time to comment was requested by
CropLife America. EPA is hereby reopening the comment period for 30
days.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES in the March 26,
2014, Federal Register document. If you have questions, consult the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: June 2, 2014.
 Jack Housenger,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-13626 Filed 6-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 47 (Monday, March 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15299-15303]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05481]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R02-RCRA-2013-0144; FRL-9693-2]

New York: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: New York State has applied to EPA for final authorization of
changes to its hazardous waste program under the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended, commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these changes, with
limited exceptions, satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for
final authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes through
this direct final action.

DATES: This final authorization will become effective on May 10, 2013
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by April 10, 2013. If EPA
receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final rule or those paragraphs or sections of this rule which
are the subject of the comments opposing the authorization in the
Federal Register and inform the public that only the portion of the
rule that is not withdrawn will take effect. (See Section E of
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further details).

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by EPA-R02-RCRA-2013-0144,
by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, to the attention of Michael Infurna.
     Mail: Send written comments to Michael Infurna, EPA,
Region 2, 290 Broadway, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10007.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Michael
Infurna, EPA, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10007.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal
hours of operation. The public is advised to call in advance to verify
the business hours. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-RCRA-
2013-0144. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available on line
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://

www.regulations.gov, or email. The Federal http://www.regulations.gov
Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If
you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties, and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters or any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. (For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm).
    Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-R02-RCRA-2013-0144. All documents in the docket are listed
in the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although it may be listed
in the index, some information might not be publicly available, e.g.,
CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy. You can view and copy New
York's application during business hours at the following addresses:
EPA Region 2 Library, 290 Broadway, 16th Floor, New York, NY 10007,
Phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials,
625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-7250, Phone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The
public is advised to call in advance to verify the business hours of
the above locations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Infurna, EPA Region 2, 290
Broadway, 22nd floor, New York, NY 10007; telephone number (212) 637-
4177; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 268, 270, 273 and 279.

B. What decisions have we made in this rule?

    We conclude that New York's application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant New York final authorization
to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in
the authorization application. New York has responsibility for
permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within
its borders (except in Indian Country) and for carrying out the aspects
of the RCRA program described in its revised program application,
subject to the limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by
Federal regulations that EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA
take effect in authorized States before the States are authorized for
the requirements. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and
prohibitions in New York, including issuing permits if necessary, until
the State is granted authorization to do so.

C. What is the effect of this authorization decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in New York subject
to RCRA will now have to comply with the authorized State requirements
instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to comply with
RCRA. New York has enforcement responsibilities under its State
hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but EPA retains
its authority under statutory provisions, including but not limited to,
RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003. These sections include, but
may not be limited to, the authority to:
     Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses,
reports or other actions
     Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits
     Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions.
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the State regulations for which New York is
being authorized by this action are already effective, and are not
changed by this action.

D. Why wasn't there a proposed rule before this rule?

    EPA did not publish a proposal before this direct final rule
because we view this as a routine program change and do not expect
adverse comments that oppose this approval. We are providing an
opportunity for public comment now. In addition to this rule, in the
proposed rules section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a
separate document that proposes to authorize the State program changes.

E. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we will
withdraw this rule by publishing a document in the Federal Register
before the rule becomes effective. EPA will base any further decision
on the authorization of the State program changes on the proposal
mentioned in the previous paragraph. We will then address all public
comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to
comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, you must do so
at this time.
    If we receive adverse comments that oppose only the authorization
of a particular change to the State hazardous waste program, we will
withdraw that part of this rule but the authorization of the program
changes that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the
date specified above. The Federal Register withdrawal document will
specify which part of the authorization will become effective, and
which part is being withdrawn.

F. What has New York previously been authorized for?

    New York initially received final authorization effective on May
29, 1986 (51 FR 17737) to implement its base hazardous waste management
program. We granted authorization for changes to its program effective
July 3, 1989 (54 FR 19184), May 7, 1990 (55 FR 7896), October 29, 1991
(56 FR 42944), May 22,

1992 (57 FR 9978), August 28, 1995 (60 FR 33753), October 14, 1997 (62
FR 43111), January 15, 2002 (66 FR 57679), March 14, 2005 (70 FR 1825,
as corrected on April 4, 2005 at 70 FR 17286), August 31, 2009 (74 FR
31380) and January 12, 2010 (75 FR 1617).

G. What changes are we authorizing with this action?

    On December 18, 2008, New York submitted a program revision
application, seeking authorization of its changes in accordance with 40
CFR 271.21. Subsequently, on May 22, 2012 the State submitted signed
Attorney General Certifications for the application. New York's
revision application includes changes to the Federal Hazardous Waste
program as addressed by the federal used oil management regulations
that were published on September 10, 1992 (57 FR 41566) and amended May
3, 1993 (58 FR 26420), June 17, 1993 (58 FR 33341), March 4, 1994 (59
FR 10550), May 6, 1998 (63 FR 24963), and July 14, 1998 (63 FR 37780).
    We now make a direct final decision, subject to receipt of written
comments that oppose this action that, except as noted in Section H,
New York's hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of the
requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore,
we grant New York final authorization for the following program
revisions listed in the following table. (The New York provisions are
set forth in the Title 6, New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (6
NYCRR), Volume A-2A, Hazardous Waste Management System, amended
effective May 12, 2006 and may be found in the ``Official Compilation
of Codes Rules and Regulations of the State of New York'', published by
the Department of State, printed by West Group, as of the March 15,
2006 supplement.) The State's statutory provisions which provide the
legal basis for the State's implementation of its used oil program
include Environmental Conservation Law sections 3-0301; 23-2305; 23-
2307; 27-0703; and 27-0900 et.seq., and 71-2705. EPA is not authorizing
any new New York State civil or criminal statute in this program
revision authorization.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Description of federal
    requirement (Revision       Analogous state regulatory authority \2\
       Checklists \1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recycled Used Oil Management   Title 6 New York Codes, Rules and
 Standards (9/10/92, 57 FR      Regulations (6 NYCRR) 370.2(b)(213),
 41566; 5/3/93, 58 FR 26420;    370.2(b)(216),
 6/17/93, 58 FR 33341; 5/4/    6 NYCRR 371.1(d)(1)(ii)(`e') \3\,
 94, 59 FR 10550; 5/6/98, 63    371.1(e)(2)(xi), 371.1(f)(10),
 FR 24963; 7/14/98, 63 FR       371.1(g)(1)(ii)(`d'),
 37780; Revision Checklists     371.1(g)(1)(ii)(`e'),
 112, 122, 130, 166).           371.1(g)(1)(iii)(`b')--(`d'),
                                371.1(g)(1)(iii)(`e')[removed],
                                371.1(g)(1)(iv),
                               6 NYCRR 373-2.1(a)(6), 373-3.1(a)(6),
                               6 NYCRR 374-1.8(a)(2)(i), 374-2.1(a)
                                introductory paragraph, 374-2.1(a)(1),
                                374-2.1(a)(3), 374-2.1(a)(5) through 374-
                                2.1(a)(9), 374-2.1(a)(11) through 374-
                                2.1(a)(13), 374-2.1(a)(17), 374-
                                2.1(a)(20) through 374-2.1(a)(26), 374-
                                2.1(a)(28), 374-2.1(a)(29), 374-2.2, 374-
                                2.3 (except 374-2.3(c)(3)-(6) and 374-
                                2.3(f)), 374-2.4, 360-14.1(b)(7) 360-
                                14.1(b)(8) 374-2.5(a)(1), 374-2.5(a)(3),
                                374-2.5(a)(4), 374-2.5(a)(5)
                                introductory paragraph, 374-
                                2.5(a)(5)(i), 374-2.5(a)(5)(ii), 374-
                                2.5(a)(5)(iii) through (v), 374-2.5(b),
                                374-2.5(c), 374-2.5(d)(1), 374-
                                2.5(d)(2), 374-2.5(d)(3), 374-2.5(e)(1)
                                through 374-2.5(e)(3), 374-2.5(e)(5),
                                374-2.5(f), 374-2.5(g), 374-2.5(h), 374-
                                2.6(a)(1), 374-2.6(a)(3), 374-2.6(b),
                                374-2.6(c), 374-2.6(d) (except 374-
                                2.6(d)(4)), 374-2.6(e), 374-2.6(f), 374-
                                2.6(g), 374-2.6(h), 374-2.6(i), 374-
                                2.6(j), previous 374-2.7 and 374-2.8
                                [removed], 374-2.7(a), 374-2.7(b), 374-
                                2.7(c), 374-2.7(d)(except 374-
                                2.7(d)(4)), 374-2.7(e) (except 374-
                                2.7(e)(5) and (6)), 374-2.7(f), 374-
                                2.7(g), 374-2.7(h), 374-2.8, 374-2.9(a),
                                374-2.9(b), 374-2.9(c)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A Revision Checklist is a document that addresses the specific
  changes made to the Federal regulations by one or more related final
  rules published in the Federal Register. EPA develops these checklists
  as tools to assist States in developing their authorization
  applications and in documenting specific State analogs to the Federal
  Regulations. For more information see EPA's RCRA State Authorization
  Web page at http://www.epa.gov/osw/laws-regs/state/index.htm
\2\ The New York provisions are set forth in the Title 6 of the New York
  Codes, Rules and Regulations (6 NYCRR), as amended effective through
  May 12, 2006, unless otherwise specified.
\3\ Note that at 6 NYCRR 371.1(d)(1)(ii)(`e'), New York references old
  contact information for the Government Printing Office. The correct
  contact information, as found at 40 CFR 260.11(c) is: Superintendent
  of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402,
<PHONE_NUMBER>.

H. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?

More Stringent State Rules

    New York used oil regulations are more stringent than the
corresponding Federal regulations in a number of different areas. The
more stringent provisions are being recognized as a part of the
Federally-authorized program and are Federally enforceable. The
specific more stringent provisions are discussed in detail in the
revised Program Description New York submitted with the used oil
authorization application, and include, but are not limited to, the
following:

    1. New York requires that laboratory tests or sample analyses,
including rebuttable presumption analyses, be performed by a State-
certified laboratory. The Federal program does not contain a lab
certification program: 374-2.2(a)(2)(i)(`b')(`1'), 374-2.2(b)(1)(i),
374-2.5(e)(3)(i), 374-2.6(d)(2)(i), 374-2.7(d)(3)(i).
    2. New York does not have analogs to 40 CFR 279.55(a)(1), (a)(2)
introductory paragraph and (a)(3) because the State does not accept
reliance upon generator knowledge of the halogen content.
    3. Used oil collection centers are subject to the more stringent
transfer facility standards: 374-2.1(a)(23), 374-2.4(b)(2)(i), 374-
2.6(c)(1) introductory paragraph.
    4. Used oil transfer facilities are subject to a number of
additional requirements including the general facility standards for
processing and re-refining facilities, additional testing, reporting
and emergency procedures, and closure requirements: 374-2.5(a)(5)
introductory paragraph, 374-2.5(d)(1)(i)(`a'), 374.2.5(e)(2), 374-
2.5(f)(8), 374-2.6(c)(1)(ii)(`c'), 374-2.6(c)(1)(iv)(`b'), 374-
2.6(c)(2) introductory paragraph, 374-2.6(c)(2)(i)(`b'), 374-
2.6(c)(2)(ii)(`a'), 374-2.6(c)(2)(ii)(`f'), 374-
2.6(c)(2)(vi)(`d')(`2'), 374-2.6(c)(2)(vi)(`i').
    5. Aboveground and underground used oil tanks must also be in
compliance with more stringent installation, closure, inspection and
repair standards, and registration requirements in New York's
Petroleum Bulk Storage (PBS) rules, 6 NYCRR Parts 612, 613, and 614,
including: 374-2.2(a) introductory paragraph, 374-2.3(c)(2), 374-
2.5(f)(3)(i), (ii), and (iii), 374-2.6(e)(2) introductory paragraph,
374-2.6(e)(2)(i), (ii) and (iii), and 374-2.6(e)(7)(iii), 374-
2.6(e)(7)(i)(`a'), 374-2.7(e)(2)(i), (ii) and (iii).
    6. Unlike the federal government, the state subjects used oil
burners to the more stringent management standards in the state Air
Quality regulations of 6 NYCRR Part 225: 374-2.2(a)(5)(ii), 374-
2.5(d)(1)(iii), 374-2.7(a)(2) introductory paragraph, 374-2.9(a)(1).

    7. New York prohibits the use of used oil as a dust suppressant:
374-2.2(c)(2), 374-2.3(a)(2)(v), 374-2.5(a)(5)(v), 374-2.6(a)(3)(v),
374-2.7(a)(2)(v), 374-2.9(c).
    8. Storage of used oil must also be in compliance with local and
state fire and building codes, including NFPA-30: 374-2.3(c)(1)(i)
and (ii), 374-2.5(f)(2), 374-2.6(e)(1), 374-2.7(e)(1)(i) and (ii).
    9. Spills are subject to requirements in Article 12 of the
Navigation Law, its implementing regulations, and related provisions
in the Environmental Conservation Law and the PBS regulations, in
addition to the federal standards: 374-2.3(c)(9)(i): 374-2.5(d)(3)
introductory paragraph, 374-2.5(d)(3)(v), 374-2.5(f)(7)(i), 374-
2.6(e)(6)(i), 374-2.7(e)(8)(i)
    10. New York requires additional labeling of units associated
with used oil storage: 374-2.3(c)(8)(i), 374-2.3(c)(8)(ii), 374-
2.5(f)(6)(i), 374-2.5(f)(6)(ii), 374-2.6(e)(5)(i), 374-
2.6(e)(5)(ii), 374-2.7(e)(7)(i), 374-2.7(e)(7)(ii).
    11. New York requires additional notification, recordkeeping and
increased periods of record retention for several aspects of used
oil management: 374-2.5(e)(5), 374-2.5(g)(1) and (g)(2) introductory
paragraphs, 374-2.5(g)(1)(vi) and (g)(2)(vi), 374-2.5(g)(3), 374-
2.5(g)(4)(i), 374-2.6(g)(1) introductory paragraph, 374-
2.6(g)(1)(vi) and (g)(2)(vi), 374-2.6(g)(3), 374-2.6(h)(1)(`a') and
(`b'), 374-2.7(d)(5), 374-2.7(f)(2), 374-2.7(g)(1)(i), 374-
2.7(g)(2), 374-2.8(c)(2), 374-2.8(e)(3), 374-2.8(f)(1)(i) and 374-
2.8(f)(2).
    12. New York prohibits the storage of used oil in pits, ponds
and lagoons. Storage in surface impoundments, including those
subject to regulation under 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265, is also
prohibited: 374-2.2(c)(1).
    13. New York requires that processors/re-refiners must submit to
the department's Central Office and Regional Office, an annual
report instead of a biennial letter, as required in the federal
regulations: 374-2.6(h)(2).
    14. The New York used oil regulations have several more
stringent provisions which include, but are not limited to:
    a. New York prohibits the disposal of recyclable used oil by
means of absorbents, except to clean up spills: 374-2.2(c)(4).
    b. If a facility owner or operator does not rebut the
presumption, the owner or operator must reject the load and notify
the department Regional Solid and Hazardous Materials engineer: 374-
2.6(d)(3).
    c. Owners and operators of used oil transfer facilities must
test all incoming loads of used oil for total halogen content, in
accordance with a written quality control plan: 374-2.5(e)(2).

Broader in Scope Requirements

    We consider the following State requirements to be beyond the scope
of the Federal program, and therefore, EPA is not authorizing these
requirements. The specific broader in scope provisions are discussed in
detail in the revised Program Description New York submitted with the
used oil authorization application, and include, but are not limited
to, the following:

    1. New York regulates used oil containing greater than 50 ppm of
PCB wastes as hazardous waste, unless the PCBs were derived solely
from small capacitors; however, these wastes are not considered
hazardous wastes under the Federal RCRA program. PCB wastes are
regulated under the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) at
40 CFR part 761. The following New York used oil provisions are
broader in scope because they include requirements associated with
the regulation of PCB waste as a state-only hazardous waste: 374-
2.2(a)(9). 374-2.2(b)(1)/Table 1, 374-2.5(e)(4), 374-2.6(d)(4).
    2. New York has not adopted the Federal exclusion at 40 CFR
261.4(b)(14) which exempts from the hazardous waste regulations used
oil re-refining distillation bottoms that are used as feedstock to
manufacture asphalt products. Such used oil re-refining bottoms are
subject to regulation in New York.
    3. Subdivision 374-2.3(f) details requirements for accepting
used oil from do-it-yourselfers (DIYs) at service and retail
establishments. These requirements regulate entities not subject to
the Federal used oil regulations.

    Broader-in-scope requirements are not part of the authorized
program and EPA cannot enforce them. Although entities must comply with
these requirements in accordance with State law, they are not RCRA
requirements.

I. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

    New York will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue
to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits
still in effect which we issued prior to the effective date of this
authorization, and also to process permit modification requests for
facilities with existing permits. EPA will not issue any more new
permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the
Table in section G above after the effective date of this
authorization. Pursuant to Sec.  3006(g)(1) of RCRA, EPA may continue
to issue or deny permits to facilities within the State to implement
those regulations promulgated under the authority of HSWA for which New
York is not authorized.

J. How does today's action affect Indian country (18 U.S.C. 115) in New
York?

    The State of New York's Hazardous Waste Program is not authorized
to operate in Indian country within the State. Therefore, this action
has no effect on Indian country. EPA will continue to implement and
administer the RCRA program in these lands.

K. What is codification and is EPA codifying New York's hazardous waste
program as authorized in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by referencing
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. If this rule takes
effect, or we finalize the companion proposal to authorize the State's
changes to its hazardous waste program, we may, at a later date, amend
40 CFR part 272, subpart HH to codify New York's authorized program.

L. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements pursuant to
RCRA section 3006 and imposes no requirements other than those imposed
by State law. Therefore, this rule complies with applicable executive
orders and statutory provisions as follows.
    1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review--The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this rule from its
review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
    2. Paperwork Reduction Act--This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
    3. Regulatory Flexibility Act--After considering the economic
impacts of this rule on small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I certify that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act--Because this rule approves pre-
existing requirements under State law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(Pub. L. 104B4).
    5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism--Executive Order 13132 (64 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) does not apply to this rule because it will not
have federalism implications (i.e., 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).

    6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments--Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67240, November 6,
2000) does not apply to this rule because it will not have tribal
implications (i.e., substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes).
    7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health & Safety Risks--This rule is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it is not economically
significant and it is not based on health or safety risks.
    8. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use--This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866.
    9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act--EPA approves State
programs as long as they meet criteria required by RCRA, so it would be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, in its review of a State
program, to require the use of any particular voluntary consensus
standard in place of another standard that meets the requirements of
RCRA. Thus, section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272 Note) does not apply to this rule.
    10. Congressional Review Act--EPA will submit a report containing
this rule and other information required by the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This
action will be effective on May 10, 2013.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended
(42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b)).

    Dated: December 19, 2012.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013-05481 Filed 3-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


                             SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide (Renewal)

1. Identification of the Information Collection

a)	Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide

      EPA Number: 2031.07

      OMB Control Number 2060-0482

b)	Short Characterization:

      With this Information Collection Request (ICR), the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is seeking to renew the existing ICR for the methyl bromide critical use exemption program (CUE) under the Clean Air Act. This ICR seeks to characterize the burden associated with producing, importing, distributing, and using methyl bromide under the critical use exemption program as described in 40 CFR Part 82. In addition, it includes the burden associated with applying for the critical use exemption. Entities applying for this exemption are asked to submit to EPA applications with necessary data to evaluate the need for a critical use exemption. This information collection is conducted to meet U.S. obligations under Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol) and to implement Section 604(d)(6) of the CAA, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law No. 105-277; October 21, 1998).
      Since 2002, entities have applied to EPA for a critical use exemption that would allow for the continued production, import, and use of methyl bromide after the phaseout in January 2005. This exemption allows for consumption only in those agricultural sectors that have demonstrated that there are no technically or economically feasible alternatives to methyl bromide. The applications are rigorously assessed and analyzed by EPA experts from the Office of Pesticide Programs. On an annual basis, EPA uses the data submitted by applicants to nominate future critical uses. The Department of State, on behalf of the U.S. Government, submits the nomination to the Ozone Secretariat for their review. That review includes analyses by an international panel of experts and advisory bodies: the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) and the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). EPA makes the uses authorized internationally by the Parties to the Protocol available in the U.S. on an annual basis through the annual critical use exemption allocation rulemaking.

2.	Need For, and Use Of, the Collection

a)	Authority for the Collection

      This information collection is authorized under Section 604(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law No. 105-277; October 21, 1998).
      Because this action involves the controlled use of a pesticide, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs collaborates in the exemption application process. The regulation of pesticides is conducted under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).

b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

      The applications enable EPA to:

         *       Maintain consistency with the Protocol by supporting critical use nominations to the Parties to the Protocol, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Decision IX/6 of the Protocol;
         *       Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6), as added to the CAA in 1998;
         *       Provide EPA with necessary data to evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of methyl bromide alternatives in the circumstance of the specific use, as presented in an application for a critical use exemption.

      The reported data enable EPA to:

         *       Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6) as added to the CAA in 1998;
         *       Maintain compliance with the Protocol requirements for annual data submission on the production of ozone depleting substances;
         *       Analyze technical use data to ensure that exemptions are used in accordance with requirements included in the annual allocation rulemakings.

3.	Nonduplication, Consultation, and Other Collection Criteria

a) 	Nonduplication

      All the information requested from respondents under this ICR is authorized by statute (CAA Sections 114 and 604(d)(6)) and is not available from other sources because it is proprietary or sensitive information.

b)	Public Notice

	EPA will provide public notice and comment regarding this ICR with the publication of a notice in the Federal Register.

c)    Consultations

	EPA will consult with stakeholders familiar with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements as part of this ICR renewal.

d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

      EPA's timing for information collection is motivated by the U.S. Government's requirements under the Montreal Protocol. First, the timeline for critical use applications coincides with the critical use nomination process established by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Any deviation from that timeline would result in a forfeiture from inclusion in the U.S. nomination package and subsequent consideration by the Parties. Second, the U.S. government is required to report data to the Ozone Secretariat on an annual basis. EPA is requesting quarterly reporting from producers and importers of methyl bromide to monitor the likelihood of compliance throughout the year. These entities typically prepare quarterly reports and prefer to report smaller data sets to EPA and not leave the entire task to the end of the year. EPA is requesting annual reporting from entities such as distributors and fumigation companies because they typically have less regulatory compliance infrastructure and/or are less familiar with Protocol reporting requirements.

e)   General Guidelines

      This rule does not exceed any of the OMB guidelines found at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

f)    Confidentiality

      EPA informs respondents that they may assert claims of business confidentiality for any of the information they submit. Information claimed confidential will be treated in accordance with the procedures for handling information claimed as confidential under 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart b, and will be disclosed only if EPA determines that the information is not entitled to confidential treatment. If no claim of confidentiality is asserted when the information is received by EPA, it may be made available to the public without further notice to the respondents (40 CFR 2.203).

g)	Sensitive Information

      Individual reporting data may be claimed as sensitive and will be treated as confidential information in accordance with procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 2.

4.    The Respondents and the Information Requested

a)	Respondents NAICS Codes

	Respondents include producers, importers, distributors, and custom applicators of methyl bromide, organizations, consortia, and associations of methyl bromide users, as well as individual methyl bromide users. The appropriate North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for these entities are:

              TABLE I: NAICS CLASSIFICATION OF REGULATED ENTITIES
                                   Category
                                  NAICS code
                                   SIC code
Agricultural production
1112- Vegetable and Melon farming
0171- Berry Crops

1113- Fruit and Nut Tree Farming
0172- Grapes

1114- Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production
0173- Tree Nuts

0175- Deciduous Tree Fruits (except apple orchards and farms)

0179- Fruit and Tree Nuts

0181- Ornamental Floriculture and Nursery Products

0831- Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products

1119- Other Crop Farming

Storage Uses
115114- Postharvest Crop activities (except Cotton Ginning)

311211- Flour Milling
2041- Flour and Other Grain Mill Products

311212- Rice Milling
2044- Rice Milling

493110- General Warehousing and Storage
4225- General Warehousing and Storage

493130- Farm Product Warehousing and Storage
4221- Farm Product Warehousing and Storage
Distributors and Applicators
115112- Soil Preparation, Planting and Cultivating
0711- Soil Preparation Services

0721- Crop Planting, Cultivation, and Protection

0723- Crop Preparation Service for Market (except Cotton Ginning)

424910- Farm Supplies and Merchant Wholesalers

Producers and Importers
325320- Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing
2879- Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals

b)	Information Requested

(i) Applications
	The Agency intends to continue seeking the same information as in previous years and will use the current application forms. The following information encompasses any information that will be requested from those entities seeking a critical use exemption, and includes applications for both pre-plant and post-harvest sectors:
*       Identity of contact person(s). Unless otherwise specified, the person who submits the application will be considered the contact person for all matters relating to the critical use exemption. Requests must identify by name and telephone number one or more qualified experts who may be contacted in case any questions arise concerning the application.
*       Description of the proposed use. The applications shall provide information on the proposed use (crop/pest combination), the amount of methyl bromide to be used, the location of use, the method of application and any other use information requested by the Administrator.
*       Description of past use. The applications shall provide information on past use (crop/pest combination), acreage, the amount of methyl bromide used, the method of application and other historical use data requested by the Administrator.
*       Consideration of alternatives (Technical). The applicant must demonstrate what steps have been, and will be, taken to find and implement alternatives. The applicant must also provide an explanation of, and data relating to, the technical feasibility of currently available alternatives for their proposed use and any other information required by the Administrator to determine whether technically feasible alternatives are available for the proposed use.
*       Consideration of alternatives (Economic). To determine whether an applicant's proposed use has economically feasible alternatives, EPA will request information on historical revenue and available economic measures, such as operating costs.
*       Additional information. Additional information required of applicants may include, but is not limited to, agricultural statistics, fumigation conditions and timeline, research proposals and funding levels, and transition plans.

(ii) Reporting
      EPA is requesting that entities provide the following information to the Agency:

Producers and importers
*    Quarterly: the quantity of methyl bromide produced or imported under the exemptions for Quarantine and Preshipment (QPS), critical uses, emergency uses, lab uses, and export to Article 5 countries;
*    Quarterly: the quantity of methyl bromide produced or imported for uses resulting in its transformation and/or destruction;
*    Quarterly: the number and type of expended and unexpended critical use allowances (CUAs);
*    Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide sold directly to critical uses;
*    Annually: the total amount and type of critical use methyl bromide held in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party;
*    Annually: the total amount of methyl bromide that was produced/imported prior to January 1, 2005, that is held in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party;
*    Periodically, (likely less than annually): information that the Administrator may reasonably require in carrying out the critical use exemption program under Section 604(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act including management and composition of pre-phaseout inventory, price of methyl bromide and its alternatives, and fumigant emissions reductions practices. EPA may also use the information gathering authority under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act to ensure compliance with existing regulations under the critical use exemption program.

Exporters
*     Quarterly: names and addresses of the exporter and the recipient of the exports, and the exporter's Employer Identification Number;
*       Quarterly: the quantity of methyl bromide exported under each exemption; the date on which, and the port from which, the controlled substances were exported from the United States or its territories; and the country to which the controlled substances were exported.

Distributors and Applicators
*       Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide purchased;
*       Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide sold directly to critical uses;
*       Annually: the total amount and type of critical use methyl bromide held in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party;
*       Annually: the total amount of methyl bromide that was produced/imported prior to January 1, 2005, that is held in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party;
*       Periodically, (likely less than annually): information that the Administrator may reasonably require in carrying out the critical use exemption program under Section 604(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act including management and composition of pre-phaseout inventory, price of methyl bromide and its alternatives, and fumigant emissions reductions practices. EPA may also use the information gathering authority under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act to ensure compliance with existing regulations under the critical use exemption program.

(iii) Recordkeeping

EPA is requiring the following records are kept for three years.
Producers, importers, and exporters
*       Self-certification form for each sale that indicates the buyer will only sell or use methyl bromide for approved critical uses;
*       Order forms and invoices for methyl bromide.

Distributors and Applicators
*       Self-certification form for each sale that indicates the buyer will only sell/use the methyl bromide for approved critical uses;
*       Order forms and invoices for methyl bromide.

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

a)	Agency Activities

(i)	Applications

	Submitted critical use exemption applications are received by the Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch (SPIB), of the Stratospheric Protection Division (SPD) of the Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP). The Biological and Economic Assessment Division (BEAD) of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) conducts a technical review of the applications. Both a biologist and an economist review each application, and the applications are grouped according to agricultural sector. Specifically, the review determines whether or not there is sufficient information to support the contention that "no technically or economically feasible alternatives exist" for the specified methyl bromide use. The review also determines if a lack of methyl bromide availability would cause a significant market disruption. These requirements for critical use exemptions were agreed to by the Parties to the Protocol at their Seventh Meeting, and are delineated in Decision IX/6, as well as Section 604(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This review may require additional consultation with the applicants if further clarification is needed.
	EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of State, compiles a nomination package containing all the critical uses to be nominated by the U.S. This package is submitted to the Ozone Secretariat of the Protocol, reviewed by MBTOC and TEAP, and later authorized by the Parties at their annual meeting. Typically, EPA must respond to one or two rounds of questions from MBTOC as that body conducts a technical review of the U.S. Nomination.
	In order to complete the application process, EPA:

*       Publishes a Federal Register notice announcing the availability of applications;
*       Collects, compiles, and analyzes submitted applications;
*       Reviews applications for completeness and informs applicants if application is not complete;
*       Reviews applications for critical need for methyl bromide (e.g., data supporting a finding that there is no technically or economically feasible alternative);
*       Compiles applications into U.S. nomination package for submission to the Ozone Secretariat

(ii)	Reported Data

Reported data are received by the Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch (SPIB), of the Stratospheric Protection Division (SPD) of the Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP).
*       All reported data are reviewed by EPA for completeness and accuracy, potentially through follow-up with the reporting entity.
*       EPA ensures that compliance has been maintained with U.S. production and consumption levels of exempted material at the national and sector levels.
*       EPA reports annually to the Ozone Secretariat, through the U.S. Department of State, on U.S. compliance with allowable production and consumption levels.
*       EPA uses data on actual use levels and material in inventory to adjust future nomination and allocation amounts.
*       EPA maintains the data in an electronic tracking system and file room.

b)	Collection and Methodology and Management

(i)	Applications

	When applications for methyl bromide critical uses are received by EPA, they are assigned a CUE number and tracked in a spreadsheet as active submissions through the process, after which applications become historical files.

(ii)	Reported Data

      Data are tracked by industry and are provided to EPA on a quarterly and/or annual basis on forms provided by the Agency on EPA's website (www.epa.gov/ozone/record/mbr.html). EPA will use our electronic tracking system to update company specific and overall U.S. compliance with production, consumption, and use. Confidential business information are stored in appropriately controlled areas.

c)	Small Entity Flexibility

      This information collection is authorized by statute under Section 604 of the Clean Air Act and is required in order to ensure U.S. compliance with international treaty obligations under the Montreal Protocol.
      Methyl bromide was phased out under the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act in 2005, except for limited exemptions. The application information collection provides meaningful relief for those users of methyl bromide who do not have technically or economically feasible alternatives. Applying for the exemption is voluntary and only those entities that believe they have a critical use will submit an application. While the exemption itself will relieve burden on affected entities, the burden on all affected entities associated with applying for the exemption, and especially the burden on small entities, has been reduced to every extent possible. EPA encouraged small businesses to participate in and/or form representative organizations that will serve to aid in gathering information and completion of applications. Today, most applications received are submitted by such organizations.
      Bearing in mind U.S. obligations under the Protocol, EPA designed a reporting and recordkeeping system that would remove almost all burden from the end users of methyl bromide, some of whom are small entities. This program seeks to place the burden instead on chemical manufacturers, distributors, and applicators who are not small entities. EPA created a system that requires end users to sign a short form (1 page in length) certifying that they are buying the exempted material for an allowable use and will use it accordingly. The form is kept by the supplier, not the end user. Participation in this exemption program is voluntary and constitutes a benefit.

d)	 Collection Schedule

(i)	Applications

	EPA annually publishes a notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the pre-plant and post-harvest applications. Entities have 90 days from the date of publication to submit an application. Applications for exemptions are requested with three years of anticipation due to the international process and EPA's notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures. For example, the first time EPA requested applications, in May 2002, the exemptions were requested for the use of methyl bromide during the 2005 calendar year. The applications requested in May 2003 were for use in the 2006 calendar year, etc. Once applications are submitted to EPA, the following schedule takes place:
*       August, Year 1: Applications due
*       September-December, Year 1: Review of applications and development of U.S. nomination
*       January, Year 2: Inter-Agency review of nomination package
*       January 24, Year 2: U.S. nomination submitted to Ozone Secretariat
*       February-June, Year 2: Advisory body (MBTOC/TEAP) review
*       November-December, Year 2: Parties authorize critical uses
*       January-December, Year 3: EPA publishes critical uses and allocates allowances in notice-and-comment rulemaking

	Subsequent collection schedules depend on the timetables established by the Parties. In some instances additional ("Extraordinary") meetings have been required, delaying the schedule.

(ii)	Reported Data

      The information is to be submitted on an annual or quarterly basis (see section 5a) to EPA beginning in the second quarter of 2015 and continuing for the life of the exemption.

6)	Estimating the Burden and Cost of Collection

a)	Estimating the Burden

      The basis of the burden analysis is EPA's experience with implementing the critical use exemption program since 2002 and EPA's previous ICR analyses for the CUE program. EPA expects that the burden estimate is conservatively high as the Agency believes that the respondents are familiar with EPA's regulations and likely have an established system for complying with those requirements.
      The burden analyzed is that associated with the application, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements of the program. As in previous ICRs, EPA identified the steps involved in applying for and complying with the requirements of the CUE program. This includes identifying the principal information needed to support U.S. nominations to Parties to the Protocol. The burden has been estimated by identifying the number of times the step will be undertaken and the number of hours required to complete each step.

b) 	Estimating the Respondent Cost

i)	Applications

      To determine the respondent cost, EPA used an hourly industry wage rate of $67.57. This is the estimated hourly mean wage rate for management within the Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services sector (541600 Series NAICS code) and is based on the May 2013 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_541600.htm. EPA added 110 percent to the hourly industry wage rate to reflect additional costs for overhead and fringe, increasing the wage rate to $141.90 per hour. EPA anticipates this rate to overestimate the burden on the whole universe of respondents, as the wage rates are lower for growers, applicators, and other respondents within the Critical Use Exemption program.
      Burden hours needed to complete each application that is forwarded to EPA is estimated to be 38. The number of applications has been declining from a maximum of 63 to 7 applications for the 2017 control period. EPA does not anticipate new users or groups to submit applications, though groups that have submitted in the past may reapply. Therefore EPA is conservatively estimating 15 applicants for future control periods. Total burden hours have decreased from the previous ICR as the it estimated 40 respondents. EPA believes that the number of hours may be an overestimate as there have been minimal formatting /data changes to the application form, encouragement of electronic submissions, frequent communication with stakeholders, and eleven years of implementation. EPA has also found that the majority of users have applied through their consortia, and that these consortia represent many growers.

ii)	Reported Data

      To determine the labor costs associated with recordkeeping and reporting, EPA used an hourly industry wage rate of $52.24. This is the average hourly wage rate for professional and related persons derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Cost and Employee Compensation Table 2 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm ), March 2014. EPA added 110 percent to the hourly industry wage rate to reflect additional costs for overhead and fringe, increasing the wage rate to $109.70 per hour. Some activities, such as rule familiarization, are one time activities therefore total respondent burden hours indicated in Table II (below) may be overestimated. This renewal, as compared to the existing ICR, reduces the expected burden for the respondents compiling and reporting data on an annual basis. The number of distributors of methyl bromide has decreased as the amount of critical use methyl bromide sold in the U.S. has decreased. As discussed above, the number of applications submitted the last three years has declined. This corresponds to a similar decrease in the end user universe which EPA now estimates to be approximately 1,000.

                  TABLE II- RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS PER YEAR
Collection Activity
No. of Respondents
Total No. of Responses
Hours per Response
Total Hours
i)  Applications
Read CAA Request for applications
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
                                                                            0.5
                                                                            7.5
Process, compile, and review the requested data for accuracy and appropriateness
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
                                                                             30
                                                                            450
Generate application correspondence (and any follow-up information requested)
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
                                                                              7
                                                                            105
Store, file, or maintain the information
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
                                                                            0.5
                                                                            7.5
Total burden for applications
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
                                                                             38
                                                                            570

ii)  Recordkeeping and Reporting
Rule Familiarization
                                                                             50
                                                                             50
                                                                              2
                                                                            100
Data Compilation (quarterly basis)
                                                                              4
                                                                             16
                                                                              4
                                                                             64
Data Compilation (annual basis)
                                                                             50
                                                                             50
                                                                              8
                                                                            400
Data Reporting (quarterly basis)
                                                                              4
                                                                             16
                                                                            0.5
                                                                              8
Data Reporting (annual basis)
                                                                             50
                                                                             50
                                                                              1
                                                                             50
Reporting on Allowance Trading Activities
                                                                              4
                                                                             32
                                                                            0.5
                                                                             16
Responding to periodic questions regarding CUE program and fumigation industry
                                                                             50
                                                                             50
                                                                              1
                                                                             50
Self-certification Activities by Producers, Importers, and Distributors
                                                                             50
                                                                             50
                                                                           0.25
                                                                           12.5
Self-certification Activities by End Users
                                                                          1,000
                                                                          1,300
                                                                           0.25
                                                                            325
Total Burden for reporting and recordkeeping
                                                                          1,054
                                                                           1614
                                                                           17.5
                                                                        1,025.5
COMBINED TOTAL BURDEN HOURS
                                                                           1069
                                                                           1629
                                                                           55.5
                                                                        1,595.5

      There are no capital and operating costs associated this action.

                    TABLE III- CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

Activity
No of Entities Affected
Estimated Annual Cost per entity
Total Estimated Annual Cost
TOTAL CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS
0
0
0

c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	The estimated cost to the Federal Government of the critical use exemption process consists of two components. The first is the number of hours and costs incurred by the Agency to review each application. The second is the number of hours and costs incurred by the Agency in reviewing reported data, preparing nominations, submitting data to the Ozone Secretariat on U.S. compliance, distributing critical use allowances, and developing guidance for regulated entities.
      The calculations below are based on combined OAR/OPP experience implementing the CUE program over the past twelve years. The Agency burden in reviewing each application remains the same as the previous ICR but the total burden has decreased as the number of sectors applying to the program has decreased. The values in this renewal for recordkeeping and reporting are also less than the sum of the burdens listed in the prior ICR.
	The hourly wage rates for EPA clerical, technical and managerial staff were derived from the 2014 OPM pay table multiplied by 1.6, the standard government benefits multiplier. The hourly wage rates are as follows: EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost of $95.82 (GS-15 level) for managerial costs, $68.94 (GS-13 level) for technical staff, and $32.69 (GS-7 level) for clerical staff based on 2014 figures. While the number of occurrences of each activity is shown per application, EPA intends to continue grouping applications according to agricultural sectors. Each hour of extramural (contractor) time is valued at $132.00 per hour including overhead and fringe benefits.

                            TABLE IV- AGENCY BURDEN HOURS

No. of Responses
Managerial hours per response
Technical hours per response
Clerical hours per response
Extramural hours per response
i)  Applications
Read and review the applications for completeness; make appropriate amount of electronic/paper copies
                                                                             15
                                                                              0
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              0
Review information submitted for accuracy
                                                                             15
                                                                              0
                                                                             10
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Perform economic and technical analysis and compile nomination on proposed exemption to the Ozone Secretariat
                                                                             15
                                                                              5
                                                                             40
                                                                             45
                                                                              0
Respond to questions on Nomination from MBTOC/TEAP (advisory bodies to Parties to Protocol)
                                                                             15
                                                                              2
                                                                             10
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Final decision on each sector
                                                                             12
                                                                             10
                                                                             15
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Store, file, and maintain applications
                                                                             15
                                                                              0
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              0
TOTAL per response (applications)

                                                                             17
                                                                             77
                                                                             47
                                                                              0
TOTAL per year (applications)

                                                                            225
                                                                          1,110
                                                                            705
                                                                              0

i)  Reporting and Recordkeeping
Process annual reports
                                                                             75
                                                                           0.25
                                                                              1
                                                                              0
                                                                           0.25
Process quarterly reports
                                                                             40
                                                                           0.25
                                                                              1
                                                                              0
                                                                           0.25
Report to the Ozone Secretariat
                                                                              1
                                                                           0.25
                                                                             10
                                                                              0
                                                                              1
Provide Guidance
                                                                             30
                                                                           0.25
                                                                              1
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
Seek information on CUE program and fumigation industry
                                                                             75
                                                                           0.25
                                                                           0.25
                                                                              0
                                                                              0
TOTAL per response (recordkeeping and reporting)

                                                                           1.25
                                                                          13.25
                                                                              0
                                                                            1.5
TOTAL per year (recordkeeping and reporting)

                                                                          55.25
                                                                         173.75
                                                                              0
                                                                          29.75

TOTAL FOR ALL AGENCY ACTION PER YEAR

                                                                            280
                                                                          1,284
                                                                            705
                                                                             30

d)	Estimating the Respondent Universe

	EPA's estimate of the number of regulated entities is based upon the Agency's experience regulating those entities under the CUE program for the last twelve years. This program does not require reporting or recordkeeping from end users of methyl bromide, but the Agency is able to make an estimation based on self-reported data from entities who requested an exemption.
	As mentioned above, the number of applications has been declining, and was 7 for the 2017 control period. The number of applicants for the exemption is much less than the estimated end user universe of 1,000 as the majority of end users apply through their consortia, not individually. EPA continues to encourage users with similar circumstances to utilize grower and user organizations to aid in completion of the application, thereby reducing both the burden on applicants (particularly small businesses) and the Agency. The registration of additional alternatives in the U.S. has also resulted in fewer applications received.
	There are 4 producers and importers of methyl bromide who report quarterly and up to 50 distributors/ applicators of methyl bromide who may report annually. Thus the total number of respondents is estimated to be 1,069 (1,000 end users, 15 applicants, 50 distributors/applicators, and 4 producers/importers).

e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

      i) The burden hour portion of the respondent application, reporting, and recordkeeping burden and operating/capital costs are estimated in Tables II and III respectively. The dollar estimate associated with this burden is displayed in Table V below. The total annual labor cost burden is $624,721.

                  TABLE V- RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS
                                   Response
                                No of Responses
                              Hours per response
                                   Cost/Hour
                                  Total Cost
Application
                                                                             15
                                                                             38
                                                                       $141.90
                                                                       $80,883
Recordkeeping and Reporting
                                                                            264
                                                                           17.5
                                                                       $109.70
                                                                      $506,814
Self-certification: producers, importers, distributors, end users
                                                                          1,350
                                                                           0.25
                                                                       $109.70
                                                                       $37,024
Total

                                                                      $624,721

	ii) Agency burden is reported in Table IV. This includes technical review of each application as well as distributing critical use allowances, reviewing reporting data, submitting data to the Ozone Secretariat on U.S. compliance, preparing nominations, and developing guidance for regulated entities. The total annual labor cost burden below in Table VI is $8,474 per application and $1,231 per recordkeeping and reporting response. Total annual cost to the Agency is $142,329.

                TABLE VI- ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS

Managerial Hours Annual Total
Technical Hours Annual  Total
Clerical Hours Annual Total
Extramural Hours Annual Total
Total Agency Hours per Response
Total Agency Costs per Response

$95.82
$68.94
$32.69
$132.00

Part I.  Hours per response
     -Application
                                                                             17
                                                                             77
                                                                             47
                                                                              0
                                                                            141
                                                                         $8,474
     -Recordkeeping and reporting
                                                                           1.25
                                                                          13.25
                                                                              0
                                                                            1.5
                                                                             16
                                                                         $1,231
Part II. Hours per year
     -Application
                                                                            225
                                                                           1110
                                                                            705
                                                                              0
                                                                           2040

     -Recordkeeping and reporting
                                                                          55.25
                                                                         173.75
                                                                              0
                                                                          29.75
                                                                         258.75

TOTAL HOURS
                                                                         280.25
                                                                       1,283.75
                                                                            705
                                                                          29.75
                                                                       2,298.75

TOTAL COSTS
                                                                        $26,854
                                                                        $88,502
                                                                        $23,046
                                                                         $3,927
                                                                       $142,329

f)	Reasons for Change in Burden

	There is a decrease of 1,663 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the burden currently approved by OMB. The primary reason for the decrease in burden hours is a decrease in the number of applicants and end users as well as distributors of methyl bromide. The CUE Allocation rule for 2014/2015 removed minor reporting and recordkeeping requirements related to critical stock allowances. In addition, after December 31, 2014, when methyl bromide is phased out in developing countries, certain reporting requirements related to the production and export of methyl bromide to those countries are no longer applicable.

g)	Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.0 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0743, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select "search," then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0743 and OMB control number 2060-0482 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

      This Section is not applicable.