Statement Supporting the Renewal of the Information Collection Request

for the Community Right-to-Know Reporting Requirements of the

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a)	Title of the Information Collection Request

Community Right-to-Know Reporting Requirements under sections 311 and
312 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA)(Renewal) – EPA No. 1352.11

1(b)	Short Characterization

This information collection request (ICR) was previously approved as OMB
No. 2050-0072 through January 31, 2008, for, 2,028,700 hours. The owner
or operator of any facility that is required to prepare or have
available a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)  for a hazardous chemical
under the Hazard Communication Standard of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) must submit an MSDS to the state emergency
response commission (SERC), the local emergency planning committee
(LEPC), and the local fire department for each hazardous chemical stored
on-site in a quantity greater than the reporting threshold.
Alternatively, a list of subject chemicals, grouped by hazard type, may
be submitted instead.  The current reporting threshold is 10,000 pounds
unless the chemical is specifically listed as an extremely hazardous
substance (EHS) under EPCRA section 302, in which case the reporting
threshold becomes 500 pounds or the threshold planning quantity (TPQ),
whichever is less.  The reporting threshold for gasoline (all grades
combined) is 75,000 gallons and for diesel fuel (all grades combined) is
100,000 gallons, when stored entirely underground at retail gas stations
that are in compliance with UST regulations.  Section 311 of EPCRA
allows the public the same access to MSDSs that facilities provide to
their employees.

The submittal of a list of chemicals or MSDSs was a one-time
requirement, to be completed by October 17, 1987.  However, facilities
must submit updates to the list or MSDSs, within three months, when a
hazardous chemical comes on-site above the reporting threshold.  If
significant new information arises concerning a previously submitted
MSDS, a facility must submit a revised MSDS.  Additionally, if the SERC
or LEPC receives a request, the facility must provide an MSDS, even if
the hazardous chemical is stored below the reporting threshold.

Section 312 of EPCRA requires owners and operators of facilities subject
to section 311 to annually report the inventories of those chemicals
reported under section 311.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is required to publish two emergency and hazardous chemical inventory
forms, known as “Tier I” and “Tier II,” for use by these
facilities.  The Tier I Form provides the minimum amount of information
necessary to comply with the section.  Any facility that is required to
submit an MSDS or list of chemicals under section 311 must submit a Tier
I form annually on March 1, incorporating the chemicals reported under
section 311.  Tier I Forms are submitted to the SERC, LEPC, and local
fire department.  The Tier II Form, which provides chemical-specific
information, is submitted in lieu of the Tier I Form only if
specifically requested by the SERC or LEPC.  Many States have more
stringent requirements, such as additional chemicals and lower reporting
thresholds.

EPCRA authorized EPA to publish regulations and the forms for hazardous
chemical reporting, codified in 40 CFR part 370.  On October 15, 1987,
EPA published the final rule and the emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory reporting forms (Tier I and Tier II).   The regulations were
revised in July 26, 1990 and February 11, 1999.  EPA published a
proposed rule on June 8, 1998 to streamline the reporting requirements
for hazardous chemical reporting.  A portion of this proposed rule was
finalized on February 11, 1999.  Other issues that were proposed will be
finalized in the near future.

EPA estimates that 350,000 manufacturing and non-manufacturing
facilities are currently subject to reporting and recordkeeping
requirements under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  The total annual burden
to all facilities is estimated to be 3,655,572 hours at a cost of
$5,990,842,393.  There are estimated to be 3,552 SERCs and LEPCs.  The
total annual burden associated state and local activities is estimated
to be 136,840 hours at a cost of $3,127,680.  MSDSs, chemical lists, and
Tier I/II forms are not submitted to EPA.  Therefore, no Agency burden
is estimated in association with this ICR.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

The authority for these requirements is EPCRA sections 311 and 312 (42
U.S.C. §11011 and §11012).

Section 311 requires the owner or operator of any facility that is
required to prepare or have available an MSDS for a hazardous chemical
under OSHA regulations to submit an MSDS for each such chemical, or a
list of chemicals, to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department.  This
submittal allows local emergency planners/responders and the community
to have the same information regarding the hazards of a chemical at the
facility.

Section 312 requires the same owners or operators of facilities to
annually report the inventories of the chemicals reported under section
311.  Section 312(g) requires EPA to publish emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms for use by facilities subject to this section.
In final rules published in the Federal Register on October 15, 1987,
and July 26, 1990, EPA published the two “formats” required under
EPCRA, “Tier I” and “Tier II.”  Tier I is the minimum amount of
information necessary to comply with the section.  Using Tier I,
facilities aggregate reportable chemicals by hazard type and provide the
quantities and locations of the chemicals.  The Tier II Form is
chemical-specific information and only needs to be submitted (in lieu of
the Tier I Form) if specifically requested by the SERC or LEPC.

2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The reports required under sections 311 and 312 are submitted to the
state and local officials which will be then accessible to the public.
The public will have knowledge of the hazards in their community.  State
and local officials also use the information submitted to them for
developing emergency response plans for their community.

3.	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3(a)	Non-Duplication

Many states have laws that require information similar to that called
for by sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA.  EPA allows the state program to
suffice for reporting provided that the minimum reporting requirements
are met.  The burden estimate in this ICR also includes burden imposed
on facilities that comply with State requirements.

3(b)	Consultations

EPA received information from the Regions on the number of facilities
that may be covered under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  EPA also
contacted few industries to estimate the burden imposed by the
requirements under sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA.

Omaha Steaks “F” Street Plant				Stafford Water Treatment Plant

Omaha, NE 						Novato, CA

<PHONE_NUMBER><PHONE_NUMBER>

	Tom Ovichi						Robert Clark

	Valero Refining Co.					Willow Brook Foods, Inc.

Corpus Christi, TX					Springfield, MO

(361) 289-8406<PHONE_NUMBER>

Pfizer Global Mfg.					East Penn Mfg.

Groton, CT						Lyon Station, PA

(860) 686-2595<PHONE_NUMBER>

	Jim Constantine						Karyn George

United States Cold Storage 				KIK Custom Products

Minooka, IL						Danville IL

(773) 844-9110<PHONE_NUMBER>

Jim Morrela						Melvin Sneed

Terra Nitrogen

Claremore, OK

(918) 266-1511

Jim Schellhome

3(c)	Public Notice

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
the Agency has notified the public through the Federal Register notice
on the renewal of this ICR on August 6, 2007 (72 FR 43636).  EPA
received comments from two industry trade associations.  Both have
raised same concerns on the Agency’s burden estimates and the burden
caused by inconsistent implementation in different States.  One
commenter also raised that EPA should finalize some revisions that were
proposed previously to minimize burden imposed on facilities.  EPA
addresses responses to each of the comments below.

	Commenters stated that the supporting statement was not available on
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  so the
comments submitted were on the previously approved ICR.  Commenters were
concerned that EPA may use the same estimates that EPA developed in the
previous ICR.  For the initial public comment period, the Agency
requested comments on the ICR that is currently active, which was
approved by OMB.  The Agency used the same burden obtained from
facilities but the cost was estimated based on the recent information
from Bureau of Labor and Statistics.  In the previous ICR, EPA used the
weighted average making some assumptions on the percentage of each
sector that may be complying with EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  The
Agency applied hours that was reported by the facilities that the Agency
contacted.  In previous ICRs, EPA only contacted small to medium size
facilities.  EPA assumed that these facilities, specifically, small
facilities would find more difficulty in complying than larger
facilities that may have more resources and electronic capabilities.
Commenters are well aware that since EPA does not receive any of the
information filed under sections 311 and 312, EPA must rely on the best
information available to estimate the burden.  EPA used the number of
establishments from the U.S. Census data and the number of facilities
that comply with other EPA programs to determine the number of
facilities in each sector to develop the weighted average.  Commenters
may be also aware that under the Paperwork Reduction Act, an Agency is
not allowed to conduct a survey of more than 9 without an approval from
OMB for the survey.  Therefore, the Agency had to take a sample from the
estimated number of universe (560,000 facilities) that may be subject to
the requirements under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  During the public
comment period for this ICR, the Agency has contacted large facilities
as well as small and medium size facilities in both manufacturing and
non-manufacturing sectors to develop estimates.

	The commenters also stated that EPA contacted food industry to develop
burden estimates although food and food additives are excluded from the
reporting requirements under EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  EPA agree with
the commenters that there is an exemption under EPCRA section 311 from
the definition of hazardous chemical for any food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA).  However, EPA would like to clarify that this
exemption only applies to those substances that are regulated by the
FDA.  Facilities may have other chemicals on site that may not be
covered by this exemption and those are reportable under EPCRA sections
311 and 312 if they meet the applicable threshold.

	Commenters were also concerned that EPA only contacted small to medium
size facilities.  The reason that the Agency contacted only these
facilities is because we believe that these facilities may lack
resources and technical personnel to assist the owner or operator to
comply with the requirements.  We also believe that they may not have
the electronic capabilities to store information from previous year that
they may be able to duplicate.  Most of the facilities that EPA has
contacted mentioned that they report same information from the previous
year.  As one of the commenter stated, the Agency agrees that large
facilities have experience in complying with the requirements under
EPCRA sections 311 and 312 since the regulations were promulgated since
October 1987.   EPA is also aware that large facilities have the
resources, technical expertise and electronic capabilities to keep track
of chemical inventory, hazard information etc.  However, EPA contacted
large facilities as well as small and medium size facilities to develop
burden estimates for this ICR.  EPA also contacted non-manufacturers to
determine how the requirements affect these sectors.  See Section 6 of
this supporting statement on the details of the development of burden
and cost estimates.

	Commenters also stated that the most significant cause for unnecessary
burden is the inconsistent implementation among States.  EPCRA was
created to encourage and support State and local planning for
emergencies caused by the release of hazardous chemicals and to provide
citizens and governments with information concerning potential chemical
hazards present in their communities.  EPCRA section 303 requires each
LEPC to prepare emergency plan for their community and submit the plan
to the SERC for review.  The SERC then review the plan and make
recommendations to the LEPC to revise the plan if necessary to ensure
coordination of emergency response plans with other emergency planning
districts.  EPA believes that each State and local entity has a unique
use and need for the information that is reported under EPCRA sections
311 and 312.  The hazardous chemical information received is used for
developing emergency response plans.  Therefore, these entities are
given the flexibility to implement the program as they need, to have
additional requirements, set lower reporting thresholds and require
different method for reporting the information, which includes
electronic reporting.  40 CFR sections 370.40 and 370.41 state that in
lieu of the forms published by EPA, the facility owner or operator may
submit a State or local form.  The preamble to the October 15, 1987
final rule provides flexibility to States and local governments on the
medium to be used in reporting, including electronic reporting.  In the
June 8, 1998 proposed rule, EPA provided draft guidance to State and
local agencies on various options they may use to implement reporting
under sections 311 and 312.  EPA stated that even without finalizing the
guidance, States and local officials may implement any of the options,
including electronic reporting provided in the draft guidance.  The
Agency believes that, by collecting information electronically will
allow State and local officials, especially emergency responders to have
information readily available in emergencies rather than searching
through submissions in paper.

Soon after the regulations were promulgated in 1987, State and local
officials that receive the information filed under EPCRA sections 311
and 312 began to express concern of the tremendous burden imposed on
these entities to manage the submissions in paper from thousands of
facilities.  Their concerns were mainly focused on finding the
information during an emergency situation, since these entities may have
to search through their filing system.  Therefore, they were given the
flexibility to create electronic tools to accept the Tier II
information.  Many States have created their own software for facilities
to use for reporting.  EPA also created an electronic software, Tier
II*Submit for those States that do not have the resources to create
their own software.  As mentioned above, the information submitted under
EPCRA sections 311 and 312 is used for developing emergency response
plans and preparing the community.   EPA does not believe that there is
tremendous burden imposed on facilities as commenters stated due to the
variation in State Tier II requirements.  Facilities are not required to
create any software to report information since the States either
require Tier II* Submit or the State created software.  It is easier for
the State and local officials to access information if stored
electronically.   Also, as mentioned above, each State or a local agency
has a unique need for the information. Therefore, they are given the
flexibility to implement the program as necessary.  To prevent and
prepare a community from a chemical release, it is a joint effort by
industry, State and local officials.  EPA encourages facilities to use
available resources to ensure that the community is better prepared in
an emergency, which is the purpose of EPCRA.  EPA believes that keeping
the community safe is more valuable than the resources used by
facilities to comply with the reporting requirements.

One of the commenters requested that EPA should revise the regulations
to reduce some burden under the reporting requirements for sections 311
and 312.  This commenter also requested clarification on some of the
issues proposed in March 1989 and June 1998.  One of the revisions that
the commenter suggested was proposed on June 8, 1998.  EPA proposed to
provide relief from routine reporting of substances with minimal hazards
and minimal risks.  The Agency may finalize this issue as well as other
issues that were proposed in Jun 1998 in the near future.

The second revision that the commenter requested was proposed on March
29, 1989.  In that notice, EPA proposed to allow establishments located
on a single site to submit separate reports as long as the entire
facility as a single unit (all establishments combined) is used as the
basis for determining compliance.  EPA received approximately fifteen
comments on this issue in 1989.  Of these, twelve commenters opposed
EPA’s proposal. Therefore, as requested by these commenters, EPA did
not finalize this revision at that time.  EPA may review all the
comments submitted in 1989 once more and the comments submitted with
this ICR renewal and then the Agency may either provide guidance or
revise the regulations.  In the meantime, EPA encourages facilities to
contact their States and local officials to find out the best way to
comply with the requirements of sections 311 and 312 for facilities with
multi-establishment units.  As mentioned above, the information reported
under sections 311 and 312 is used for developing emergency response
plans and for responding chemical releases.  This information is best
used at local levels to protect the community.

This commenter also requested clarification on threshold determinations
for mixtures containing hazardous chemicals that are not extremely
hazardous substances.  EPA proposed four revisions to the threshold
determinations and reporting of mixtures in the regulations under
sections 311 and 312.  EPA is currently in the process of finalizing
some of the revisions that were proposed in June 8, 1998.  EPA will
consider all the comments that the Agency received to make a final
decision on any revisions that were proposed.

The commenter also requested clarifications on these issues:

	Groupings for EPCRA section 311 reporting

	On-site Storage versus percent on-site

	Mixture vs. Chemical for some CAS#

	Combining similar material materials for reporting purposes

	Scope of the laboratory exemption

EPA will update the Agency’s website under EPCRA Frequently Asked
Questions and Answers to clarify these issues.

3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The reporting deadlines for sections 311 and 312 are set by statute.
EPA has no authority to allow less frequent collection.

3(e)	General Guidelines

The collection activities specified in this renewal ICR adhere to the
guidelines specified by OMB.

3(f)	Confidentiality

The respondent may claim specific chemical identities as trade secret in
reports submitted under Section 312 and in the list of chemicals and
material safety data sheets submitted under Section 311.  Such
information must be submitted according to EPCRA sections 322 and 323
(40 CFR Part 350).

All trade secrecy claims submitted to EPA under Title III are handled
and stored according to procedures set out in the Manual for Physical
Handling, Security, and Protection of Files containing Trade Secret
Claims Submitted under Sections 303, 311, 312 and/or 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community  Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), December
2003.  These procedures were developed for Title III trade secrecy
claims with the knowledge that these documents are sensitive.  Handling
and review of documents containing Title III trade secret information is
permitted only by persons who have obtained formal clearance to access
the information based on a work-related need to engage in these
activities.  When not being processed or reviewed by authorized
individuals, the claim submissions containing trade secret information
are stored in restricted access areas.  To ensure that appropriate
handling procedures are activated and the confidentiality of Title III
trade secret submissions is maintained, the Agency attaches a cover
sheet to the top of each trade secret document and otherwise marks the
document to clearly identify the document as Title III confidential.

3(g)	Sensitive Questions

The information gathering activities under this renewal ICR do not
involve any sensitive

questions.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a)	Respondents/SIC Codes

Sections 311 and 312 are applicable to all facilities that are required
to prepare or have available an MSDS for a hazardous chemical as
required under OSHA.

Section 1910.1200 of the OSHA regulations provides exemptions from the
definition of hazardous chemical.

In addition, Section 311(e) of EPCRA excludes the following substances:

•	Any food, food additive, color additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated
by the Food and Drug Administration;

•	Any substance present as a solid in any manufactured item to the
extent exposure to the substance does not occur under normal conditions
of use;

•	Any substance to the extent it is used for personal, family, or
household purposes, or is present in the same form and concentration as
a product packaged for distribution and use by the general public;

•	Any substance to the extent it is used in a research laboratory,
hospital, or other medical facility under the direct supervision of a
technically qualified individual; and

•	Any substance to the extent it is used in routine agricultural
operations or is a fertilizer held for sale by a retailer to the
ultimate customer.

Also, reporting thresholds have been established under sections 311 and
312.  A facility must report those hazardous chemicals that are present
at the facility at any time at or above the following levels:

•	For hazardous chemicals other than EHSs, the reporting threshold is
10,000 pounds.

•	For EHSs, 500 pounds or the threshold planning quantity (TPQ),
whichever is less.

For gasoline, 75,000 gallons (all grades combined) and 100,000 gallons
for diesel fuel (all grades combined), when stored entirely underground
at retail gas stations that are in compliance with UST regulations.

4(b)	Information Requested

4(b)(i)	Data Items

Facilities having chemicals subject to section 311 are required to
submit MSDSs for these chemicals.  These MSDSs are the same as those
required under OSHA regulations.  A facility can also fulfill its
section 311 reporting obligation by submitting a list of chemicals that
are subject to the requirements, grouped by the following hazard types:
fire, sudden release of pressure, reactivity, immediate health hazard,
and acute health hazard.

On or before March 1 of each year, facilities having chemicals that need
reporting must submit a Tier I Form.  However, the Tier II Form may be
submitted in lieu of the Tier I.  The Tier I Form includes the following
information as required by the statute:

•	An estimate in ranges of the maximum amount of hazardous chemicals
in each hazardous category present at the facility at any time during
the previous year; and

•	An estimate in ranges of the average daily amount of hazardous
chemicals on-site in each hazard category.

EPA has added the following information by regulation:

•	Primary SIC code and Dun and Bradstreet number of the facility

•	Two emergency contacts (added to give SERCs, LEPCs, and local fire
departments a contact at the facility who could clarify information at
any time, particularly in the event of an emergency); and

•	Number of days on-site (added to produce a more accurate estimate of
the average daily amount, particularly for those chemicals that are
on-site for only a short period of time each year).

Even if Tier II information is not submitted in lieu of Tier I, it must
be submitted upon request by the SERC, LEPC, or local fire department.
The Tier II Form includes the following information as required by
statute:

•	The chemical name;

•	An estimate in ranges of the maximum daily amount of the hazardous
chemical present at the facility at any time;

•	An estimate in ranges of the average daily amount of hazardous
chemicals present at the facility during the previous year;

•	A brief description of the manner of storage of the hazardous
chemical; and

•	The location of the hazardous chemical within the facility.

EPA has added the following items in its regulations:

•	CAS number to identify more accurately each chemical that is
reported;

•	The physical state to help identify the type of hazard a chemical
represents in an emergency;

•	The physical and health hazards associated with the chemical;

•	Primary SIC code and Dun and Bradstreet number of the facility

•	Two emergency contacts (added to give SERCs, LEPCs, and local fire
departments a contact at the facility who could clarify information at
any time, particularly in the event of an emergency); and

•	Number of days on-site (added to produce a more accurate estimate of
the average daily amount, particularly for those chemicals that are
on-site for only a short period of time each year).

4(b)(ii)	Respondent Activities

To determine if it is subject to section 311, a facility must look at
inventory records for all of its chemicals that are required to have
MSDSs.  The facility would also have to review the EHS list to determine
if any of its chemicals are subject to a lower reporting threshold.

If the facility determines that it has chemicals that must be reported,
it must determine the address of the SERC, LEPC, and local fire
department.  Copies of the MSDSs for these chemicals may be submitted,
or if preferred, the facility may provide a list of the subject
chemicals grouped by hazard type.  To use the list option, the facility
would have to read the MSDS to determine into which of the five hazard
types the chemical falls and to identify it on the list.

The same chemicals that a facility would need to report under section
311 would need to be reported under section 312.  To complete the Tier I
form, the facility would need to monitor its inventory records for the
chemical (to determine the inventory information), add the quantities
together for chemicals having the same hazards, and determine the
correct code for the total quantity.

A site map may be easier to show locations of hazardous chemicals, or
the facility may choose to provide the general location.

5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED:  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a)	Agency Activities

No information provided under sections 311 and 312 is sent to EPA.  All
of the information is collected and kept at the state and local
agencies.

5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

EPA does not receive the data; therefore, EPA does not have any special
data collection methodology and management.  EPA created a computer
software for use by facilities to submit Tier II reports.   Some states
have also created softwares using their own resources.  Facilities in
states having the ability to receive section 311 and 312 information
electronically are encouraged to use that option.

5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

The burden hours for small businesses are considered to be smaller than
those for large facilities because of the reduced number of chemicals
present at smaller facilities.

5(d)	Collection Schedule

The frequency of collection for these sections of EPCRA is required by
statute.  Also, facilities are required to report any relevant changes
when they occur.  The submittal of a list of chemicals or MSDSs under
Section 311 is a one-time requirement, unless significant new
information arises concerning a previously submitted MSDS, in which
case, a facility should submit a revised MSDS.  Facilities must submit
updates to the list or MSDSs, within three months, when a new hazardous
chemical comes on-site above the reporting threshold.    The facilities
subject to Section 312 is required to submit either Tier I or Tier II on
March 1 annually.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden

EPA estimated the respondent burden hours and costs associated with all
recordkeeping and reporting requirements of EPCRA sections 311 and 312.
EPA contacted the Regions to obtain an estimate on the number of
facilities that comply with EPCRA sections 311 and 312.  Based on the
information received and taking into account for facilities in
non-compliance, EPA estimates that there are 350,000 facilities that may
be subject to the requirements covered by this ICR.  For this ICR, EPA
used the ratio reported in the U.S. Census data to estimate the number
of manufacturers and non-manufactures.  EPA estimates that out of
350,000 facilities, there are 105,000 manufacturers and 245,000
non-manufacturers.  EPA also estimated the number of small, medium and
large facilities in both manufacturers and non-manufacturers reported by
U.S. Census.

	According to the Census data in 2002 and 2004, there is a decline in
the number of manufacturing facilities.  This may be due to mergers and
acquisition.  However, EPA estimates that during the period covered by
this ICR, there will be a slight increase in the number of
manufacturers.  In the previous ICR, the Census data reported an
increase of 0.4 percent.  In this ICR, EPA also assumes that there will
be an increase of 0.4 percent.  For the three years covered by this ICR,
there will be 420 (140 annually) new facilities covered by the
requirements under sections 311 and 312.

The initial reporting burdens such as reading and understanding
regulations and section 311 submission(s) for currently covered
facilities under EPCRA sections 311 and 312 are assumed to have occurred
and are not included in this ICR.  This ICR accounts for reporting
updates under section 311, annual reporting and recordkeeping activities
under section 312 that apply to all currently regulated facilities, as
well as all initial reporting burdens for new facilities that are
expected to become subject to the reporting requirements over the
three-year ICR-approval period.  The estimated burden to complete each
reporting and recordkeeping activity is outlined below.

There are estimated to be 3,500 LEPCs and 52 SERCs.  These numbers are
assumed to remain the same during the period covered by this ICR.

The unit burden estimates associated with this collection for facilities
is in Exhibit 1.  For State and local agencies the unit burden estimate
is in Exhibit 1.

Read and Understand Regulations

EPA estimates that 140 newly regulated facilities will need to read and
understand the regulations (40 CFR Part 370).  As stated above, this
estimate is determined by applying a growth rate of 0.4 percent in the
three years covered by this ICR to the number of manufacturing
facilities subject to the regulation.  SERCs and LEPCs are assumed to
have already completed the rule familiarization activities.  EPA assumes
that it takes an average of 11.0 hours per facility to read and
understand regulations in 40 CFR Part 370.

Section 311:  MSDS Reporting for Facilities (40 CFR 370.21)

EPA estimates that 140 newly regulated facilities will need to determine
which chemicals exceed the threshold limits.  Of this universe, EPA
estimates that 30 percent (39 facilities) will submit MSDSs to LEPCs,
SERCs, and local fire departments.  Alternatively, facilities may submit
a list of hazardous chemicals grouped by hazard category or a list of
the chemical or common names of each hazardous chemical in lieu of
submitting an MSDS.  Based on these options, 70 percent (91 facilities)
are expected to submit such lists.

Of those facilities submitting lists in lieu of MSDSs, all facilities
(91 facilities) are expected to elect the option of submitting a list of
hazardous chemicals grouped by hazard category.  Facilities may comply
with this option by simply copying their Tier II form.

In addition, EPA estimates that 17,500 facilities (five percent of the
350,000 facilities reporting under section 312) will need to submit a
revised MSDS(s) and the same number of facilities (17,500 facilities)
will need to submit a new MSDS(s) in accordance with 40 CFR 370.21(c)(1)
and (2).  This activity represents the incremental burden for a facility
that has acquired a new chemical or has otherwise changed its inventory.
 Because little information is required from facilities after the
initial submittal, EPA also estimates that only one percent of the total
universe (3,500 facilities) may be specifically requested to submit an
MSDS in accordance with 40 CFR 370.21(d).  Unit burden for each activity
under section 311 is in Exhibit 1.

Section 312:  Inventory Reporting for Facilities (40 CFR 370.25)

The inventory reporting burden applies to new and currently covered
facilities.  Although EPA published two inventory forms, Tier I and Tier
II, all the States accepts only Tier II or form developed by States.
EPA is not aware of any States that will accept Tier I form.  Therefore,
EPA did not account any burden for complying with Tier I form.  Tier II
form or State developed forms are useful for developing emergency
response plans since these forms contain detailed information than Tier
I.  EPA has developed an electronic reporting method, Tier II* Submit,
which many States use.  Some States have created their own electronic
reporting method that they require facilities to use.  As of December
2006, about 29 States requires facilities to use Tier II*Submit. Eleven
States accept Tier II using a web-based system.  Only 12 States accept
Tier II in paper form.

EPA contacted nine facilities, small, medium and large.  For this ICR,
EPA assumes small facilities are those less than 100 employees, medium
facilities are those that have up to 500 employees, and large facilities
are those greater than 500 employees.  These assumptions are used for
both manufacturers and non-manufacturers.  The majority of facilities in
the non-manufacturing sector store few chemicals in amounts that exceed
reporting thresholds in relation to the number stored at manufacturing
facilities.  The corresponding burden estimates for completing Tier II
inventory forms are lower for non-manufacturing facilities.  Small
manufacturers and non-manufacturers that EPA contacted have stated that
it takes only 1 to 8 hours annually to gather information and submit
Tier II.  These facilities have indicated that they may have up to four
chemicals that exceed reporting thresholds.  For this ICR, EPA applied
the average of 6 hours for small manufacturers and 4 hours for small
non-manufacturers.  These entities have stated that when the regulations
were promulgated in 1987, gathering information and completing the form
took longer time.  It is now easier since the information is usually
same as previous year.  Medium size facilities have informed that it
takes 8 hours to 80 hours annually.  These facilities may have up to 15
chemicals that may exceed reporting thresholds.  For this ICR, EPA
applied 80 hours for medium manufacturers.  Large manufacturers that EPA
contacted have informed us that it takes 8 hours to 120 hours to gather
information and complete the form.  These facilities may have up to 25
chemicals that may exceed reporting thresholds.  For these facilities,
EPA applied 120 hours for large manufacturers.  EPA also contacted one
small and one large non-manufacturer.  They have informed the Agency
that it takes 6 hours for small manufacturer and 40 hours for large
non-manufacturer to complete and submit the form under section 312.  EPA
then used the average, 23 hours to apply for medium size
non-manufacturers.

Most of the States require facilities to submit using electronic
reporting method that State created or the Tier II* Submit.  Therefore,
the burden incurred on these facilities is lower than those submitting
in paper form.  EPA believes that those facilities submitting
electronically will have the Tier II or the State form stored which can
be revised easily.  Most of the information may be the same as previous
year.  Although the burden incurred may be lower for those submitting
electronically, EPA applied the same unit burden for both electronic
submitters and paper submitters.

Information Requests for SERCs and LEPCs (40 CFR 370.30)

Information request burdens in 40 CFR 370.30 are incurred by LEPCs and
SERCs.  These agencies are required to provide public access to the
MSDSs and Tier I/II forms submitted by facilities.  EPA estimates that
the LEPCs or SERCs will be requested to provide MSDSs to the public for
one percent of the total universe of facilities reporting Tier I or Tier
II inventories annually (3,500 facilities).  SERCs and LEPCs are also
estimated to provide Tier II information on one percent of the same
universe of facilities (3,500 facilities) as a result of requests from
the public for such information.

Data Management for SERCs and LEPCs

SERCs and LEPCs receive annual inventory forms from facilities, which
they must make available to the public on request.  The level of effort
needed to manage these forms varies depending on both the number of
forms received and the ways the LEPC or SERC uses the data.  Smaller
LEPCs receive few forms each year; LEPCs in industrialized areas or that
cover several counties and SERCs may receive a large number of forms.
The degree to which the information is used depends on whether the LEPC
or SERC has the resources to actively handle the data.  Based on earlier
discussions with LEPCs, EPA determined that small LEPCs spend on average
five hours a year handling the forms; large LEPCs may spend as much as
three months processing the forms.  SERCs supported by fees are also
likely to spend considerable time on the data.  EPA developed a weighted
average of 32.5 hours a year, based on the assumption that 120 LEPCs and
27 SERCs would devote considerable effort organizing and checking the
data.  In addition, a limited number of  SERCs and LEPCs have developed
databases and input the 312 data into their CAMEO software systems.
Based on discussions with LEPCs that have databases, EPA estimates that
this effort would require two months or 320 hours.  The number of SERCs
and LEPCs with databases is estimated to be 45, a third of the SERCs and
large LEPCs.  About twenty nine states have the capability to accept
Tier II forms electronically.

6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs

The annual costs to respondents were estimated by multiplying the
respondent burden estimates for each labor category by the corresponding
labor rate for that category.  The unit costs for each respondent or
activity are then multiplied by the number of respondents or activities
performed on an annual basis to yield a total cost for each information
collection activity in Section 6(d).  These costs are shown in Exhibit
1.

EPA estimates an hourly respondent labor cost for manufacturing facility
respondents of $52.36 for managerial staff, $52.36 for technical staff,
and $25.89 for clerical staff, including wages and benefits. Hourly
respondent labor costs for non-manufacturing facility respondents are
estimated at $45.05 for managerial staff, $45.05 for technical staff,
and $20.13 for clerical staff.  Legal review is estimated at $100 per
hour.

EPA estimates an hourly respondent labor cost (including overhead) for
LEPCs and SERCs of $41.90 for managerial staff, $28.76 for technical
staff, and $21.66 for clerical staff.

Capital and O&M Costs

Capital/start-up and operation and management (O&M) costs were also
estimated for facilities and state and local governments.  Exhibit 5
presents the capital and O&M costs for complying with sections 311 and
312.  Capital costs include the cost of space required to store
information in filing cabinets. Given that the standard-size,
five-drawer, lateral file cabinet is expected to hold approximately
36,000 pages of material, EPA estimates that the SERC and LEPCS would
need to purchase approximately 100 file cabinets within the time period
of this ICR.  (EPA assumed that MSDSs are four pages and inventory forms
one page and that the SERC and LEPC or fire department (but not both)
would maintain the records.)  Facilities are assumed to need only 10
file cabinets to maintain copies of their annual inventory reports; the
cost for storing MSDSs for facilities is covered by the OSHA’s hazard
communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200).  Using an estimated cost of
$600 per filing cabinet, the cost of purchasing the 100 filing cabinets
is estimated to be $60,000.  Annualizing the costs over 15 years, a
single file cabinet has annual cost of $40.

	State and local governments are assumed to incur capital costs in the
form of filing cabinets for the storing new and revised MSDSs, lists of
hazardous chemicals, and the annual inventory reports.  State and local
governments are expected to incur postage costs to provide MSDSs upon
written request and to provide Tier II information upon written request.
 In addition, facilities were assumed to incur postage costs for mailing
new and revised MSDSs, lists of hazardous chemicals, and the annual
inventory reports.  Postage is estimated to cost $5 per certified
package.

	Although some facilities covered by these regulations are now
submitting 312 reports electronically, EPA kept the estimates derived in
the previous ICR for capital and O&M costs for SERCs, LEPCs and
facilities.

Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

EPA estimates no annual Agency burden associated with this ICR.  Only
state and local government entities will incur burden and cost to manage
information submitted by facilities.

6(d)	Estimating Total Annual Respondent Burden

Exhibit 4 presents the respondent burden for each information collection
activity and for the sum of all information collection activities
performed by each respondent type.  Exhibit 2 and 3 present the hour and
cost burden for SERCs and LEPCs for implementing the program.  Exhibit 5
and 6 show the capital and O&M costs to facilities over the three-year
information collection period.  The total average annual respondent
burden for facilities is 3,655,592 hours, for a total annualized cost of
$197,936,905.  The total average annual respondent burden for state and
local governments for the three-year period is 136,840 hours, for a
total annualized cost of $3,127,680  These burden estimates are
summarized in Exhibits 5 and 6.

6(e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

The total burden to facility respondents over three years is 10,966,776
hours at a cost of $612,804,315.  The total burden to LEPC and SERC
respondents over three years is 410,520 hours at a cost of $9.3 million.
 Exhibits 5 and 6 present a summary of the bottom line burden and cost
estimates for section 311 and 312 reporting for facilities and state and
local governments, respectively.

6(f)	Reasons for Change in Burden

The estimated average annual burden for facilities for reporting and
recordkeeping activities under EPCRA sections 311 and 312 is 3,655,592
hours per year.  There is an increase of 1,626,892 hours from the
previous ICR for the facilities.  In previous ICRs, EPA had only
contacted small and medium size facilities since the Agency assumed that
these types of facilities will incur more burden than large facilities
that have more resources, electronic capabilities and technical
personnel.  Then EPA applied the average of 3 hours across the universe
to develop and submit the Tier II form, which EPA now believes that it
was underestimated based on the comments we received under the first
public notice of this ICR.  Therefore, EPA contacted small, medium and
large size facilities in both manufacturing and non-manufacturing
sectors to develop burden for this ICR.  Based on the conversation we
had with each of the sectors we contacted, EPA applied the burden for
each sector accordingly.

There is a decrease of approximately 209,948 respondents in the
estimated universe from the previous ICR.  EPA believes that the
universe estimates in this ICR are more accurate since most States now
collect Tier II electronically so they were able to provide EPA with a
better estimate on the number of facilities subject to sections 311 and
312 than we estimated in previous years. Additionally, labor rates have
been updated to account for inflation.

6(g)	Burden Statement

The average burden for MSDS reporting (basic and additional reporting)
is estimated at 6.75 hours for new facilities.  Additional reporting,
which is to submit revised and new MSDSs for currently covered and new
facilities is 2 hours.  The average burden for new and currently covered
facilities to submit MSDS upon request is 1 hour.  The average burden to
comply with Tier II inventory reporting for small, medium and large
manufacturers is 8, 80 and 120 hours, respectively.  The average burden
to comply with Tier II inventory reporting for small, medium and large
non-manufacturers is 6, 20, and 40 hours, respectively.  There are no
recordkeeping requirements for facilities under EPCRA sections 311 and
312 although it is assumed that they will maintain a copy of annual
reports to use for future filings.  The recordkeeping for MSDSs is
mandated under OSHA rules.

The average burden for state and local governments to respond to
requests for MSDSs or Tier II information under 40 CFR 370.30 is
estimated to be one hour per request. The average burden for managing
and maintaining the reports and MSDS files is estimated to be 32.50
hours.  The average burden for maintaining and updating a 312 database
is estimated to be 320 hours.

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 such a request, and a person or facility 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 number
EPA-HQ-SFUND-2004-0006, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Superfund Docket in the
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),  EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An
electronic version of the public docket is available
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
Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-SFUND-2004-0006 and OMB Control Number 2050-0072 in any
correspondence.

Exhibit 1

Section 311 and 312 Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

Estimated Unit Burden and Cost

Facilities

Information Collection Activity	Annual Unit Hours  	Total Hours 	Annual
Unit Cost

	Legal	Management	Technical	Clerical

RULE FAMILIARIZATION

  Read and understand regulations 	1.00	2.50	7.5	0.00	11.00	$623.60

MSDS REPORTING

Basic Reporting

Determine which chemicals meet/exceed the thresholds (new facilities)
0.00	1.00	3.00	0.00	4.00	$209.44

Submit MSDSs to SERC, LEPC, and fire department (new facilities)	0.00
0.25	1.00	0.50	1.75	$78.39

Alternative Reporting

Submit list of hazardous chemicals grouped by hazard category (new
facilities) 	0.00	0.00	1.00	0.25	1.25	$58.83

Submit revised MSDSs (new and currently covered facilities)	0.00	0.25
0.50	0.25	1.00	$45.74

Submit new MSDSs (new and currently covered facilities)	0.00	0.25	0.50
0.25	1.00	$45.74

Additional Reporting

Submit MSDS upon request (new and currently covered facilities)	0.00
0.25	0.50	0.25	1.00	$45.74

INVENTORY REPORTING

Basic Reporting

Develop and submit Tier II (new and currently covered facilities

Manufacturers

Small 	1.00	1.00	6.00	0.00	8.00	$466.52

Medium	2..00	4.00	74.00	0.00	80.00	$4,284.08

Large	4.00	8.00	108.00	0.00	120.00	$6,473.76

Non-manufacturers

Small	1.00	1.00	4.00	0.00	6.00	$325.25

Medium	2.00	2.00	16.00	0.00	20.00	$1,010. 90

Large	4.00	4.00	32.00	0.00	40.00	$2,021.80

Exhibit 2

Sections 311 and 312 Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

Estimated Unit Burden and Cost

State and Local Governments

	Annual Unit Hours 	Total Hours	Annual Unit Cost

	Legal	Management	Technical	Clerical

INFORMATION REQUESTS

File and maintain annual inventory forms and data	0.00	0.00	5.0	27.5
32.50	$957.00

Input data and maintain database of 312 data	0.00	0.00	40.0	280.00
320.00	$9,238.80

Provide MSDSs upon written request	0.00	0.00	0.50	0.50	1.00	$25.21

Provide Tier II information upon written request	0.00	0.00	0.50	0.50
1.00	$25.21

Exhibit 3

Sections 311 and 312 Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

Estimated Annual Burden

State and Local Governments

	Number of Respondents	Annual Hours Burden	Total Hours

Burden	Annual Cost

Legal	Management	Technical 	Clerical

INFORMATION REQUESTS

	File and maintain annual inventory forms and data	3,552	0.00	0.00
17,760	97,680	115,440	$2,626,526.40

Input data and maintain database of 312 data	45	0.00	0.00	1,800	12,600
14,400	$324,684.00

Provide MSDS on written request	3,500	0.00	0.00	1,750	1,750	3,500
$88,235.00

Provide Tier II information upon written request	3,500	0.00	0.00	1,750
1,750	3,500	$88,235.00

Total

136,840	$3,127,680.40

Exhibit 4

Section 311 and 312 Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

Estimated Annual Burden and Cost

Facilities

	Number of Respondents	Legal	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total Hours
Burden	Annual Cost

RULE FAMILIARIZATION

	  Read and understand regulations 	140	140	325	975	0.00	1,440
$82,068.00

	MSDS REPORTING

	Basic Reporting

	Determine which chemicals meet/exceed the thresholds (new facilities)
140	0.00	140	390	0.00	530	$27,750.20

Submit MSDSs to SERC, LEPC, and fire department (new facilities)	39	0.00
9.75	39	19.50	68.25	$3,057.

Alternative Reporting

	Submit list of hazardous chemicals grouped by hazard category (new
facilities) 	91	0.00	0.00	91.00	22.75	113.75	$5,353

Submit revised MSDSs (new and currently covered facilities)	17,500	0.00
4,375	8,750	4,375	17,500	$800,493

Submit new MSDSs (new and currently covered facilities)	17,500	0.00
4,375	8,750	4,375	17,500	$800,493

Additional Reporting

	Submit MSDS upon request (new and currently covered facilities)	3,500
0.00	875	1,750	875	3,500	$160,098

Subtotal

40,652	$1,879,312

	INVENTORY REPORTING

	Basic Reporting

	Develop and submit Tier II (new and currently covered facilities

	Manufacturers

	Small 	93,975	93,975	93,975	563,850	0.00	751,800	$43,841,217

Medium	7,875	15,750	31,500	582,750	0.00	630,000	$33,737,130

Large	3,150	12,600	25,200	340,200	0.00	378,000	$20,392,344

Non-manufacturers

	Small	240,590	240,590	240,590	962,360	0.00	1,443,540	$78,251,898

Medium	2,940	11,760	11,760	211,680	0.00	235,200	$11,241,972

Large	1,470	11,760	11,760	152,880	0.00	176,400	$8,593,032

Subtotal

3,614,940	$196,057,593

Total (Facilities)

3,655,592	$197,936,905

Exhibit 5

Summary of Total Burden and Cost Estimates

Facilities

	Total Hours

Burden (Hours)	Total Cost

Labor	Capital	O&M

	Annual	3,655,592	$197,936,905	$900	$6,330,300

	Three-Year	10,966,776	$593,810,715	$2,700	$18,990,900

Exhibit 6

Summary of Total Burden and Cost Estimates

 SERCs and LEPCs

	Total Hours

Burden

(Hours)	Total Cost

Labor	Capital	O&M

	Annual	136,840	$3,127,680	$2,700	$56,000

	Three-Year	410,520	$9,382,920	$8,100	$168,000

 In the previous ICR-approval period, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS), Employer Cost for Employee Compensation,  Table 12:  Private
Manufacturing and Non-Manufacturing Industries, December 2003, was used
to derive hourly labor costs for manufacturing and non-manufacturing
facility respondents, including wages and benefits.  The previous BLS
Employment Cost Index (ECI) reporting results relied upon the 1987
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system and the 1990
Occupational Classification System (OCS).  With Mexico and Canada, in
order to provide comparability between the statistical systems of the
three partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the
United States adopted the 2002 North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) and 2000 Standard Occupational Classification System
(SOC), which have now replaced the SIC and OCS systems respectively.
Due to this major overhaul of systems, the ECI reporting results have
changed and the hourly labor costs for manufacturing and
non-manufacturing facility respondents used in the previous ICR are no
longer available in the same format.  Thus, for the purposes of this
ICR-approval period, hourly labor costs have been pulled from Employer
Cost for Employee Compensation, Table 9:  Private Industry,
Goods-Producing and Service-Providing Industries, by Occupational Group,
June 2007.  Table 9 is the nearest match to labor categories and hourly
labor costs that were extracted from Table 12 under the previous BLS
reporting system.

 Note the above footnote regarding the change in BLS reporting
practices.  In the previous ICR-approval period, U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, Employer Cost for Employee Compensation,  Table 4:  State
and Local Government By Occupational and Industry Group, December 2003,
was used to derive hourly labor costs for state and local government
respondents, including wages and benefits.  For the purposes of this
ICR-approval period, hourly labor costs have been pulled from Employer
Cost for Employee Compensation, Table 4:  State and Local Government, by
Occupational and Industry Group, June 2007.  Table 4 offers the nearest
match to labor categories and hourly labor costs that were extracted
from Table 4 under the previous BLS reporting system.


[Federal Register: August 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 156)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41037-41039]
[DOCID:fr14au09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 385

[Docket No. RM09-20-000; Order No. 725]

Service of Interlocutory Appeals

Issued August 10, 2009.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission is amending regulations which specify on whom
persons appealing a presiding officer's denial of a motion to permit an
interlocutory appeal must serve copies of the appeal. The amendment
requires that any person filing an appeal must separately serve a copy
on not only the Motions Commissioner but also on the General Counsel.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective September 14,
2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lawrence Greenfield, Deputy Associate General Counsel, Office of the
General Counsel, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202)
502-6415<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Kirsten M. Bowden, Office of the General Counsel, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

                                                               Paragraph
                                                                 Nos.

I. Introduction.............................................           1
II. Background..............................................           2
III. Discussion.............................................           5
IV. Information Collection Statement........................           9
V. Environmental Analysis...................................          10
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act..............................          11
VII. Document Availability..................................          12
VIII. Effective Date........................................          15

I. Introduction

    1. By this instant final rule, the Commission is amending Rule
715(c)(1) of its Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.715(c)(1),
which governs the appeal process when a presiding officer has denied a
motion to permit an interlocutory appeal. This amendment specifies on
whom persons appealing a presiding officer's denial of a motion to
permit an interlocutory appeal must serve copies of the appeal. Given
that the Motions Commissioner has only seven days to act on an
interlocutory appeal, it is important that the Motions Commissioner be
made aware of the appeal as quickly as possible. Accordingly, the
amendment adopted here requires that any person filing an appeal must
serve a copy not only on the Motions Commissioner but also on the
General Counsel.

II. Background

    2. On April 28, 1982, the Commission promulgated Order No. 225,\1\
reorganizing revising, and updating its Rules of Practice and
Procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Revision of Rules of Practice and Procedure To Expedite
Trial-Type Hearings, Order No. 225, 47 FR 19014 (May 3, 1982), FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 30,358 (1982), order on reh'g, Order No. 225-A, 47
FR 35952 (August 18, 1982), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,385 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In Order No. 225, the Commission adopted Rule 715, which governs
interlocutory appeals to the Commission and sets forth the relevant
standard by which a presiding officer or the Motions Commissioner
determines whether to permit or deny an interlocutory appeal to the
Commission. These procedures allow a question raised in a proceeding
pending before a judge, or other presiding officer, to be determined by
the Commission at a time prior to presentation of the entire case to
the Commission for decision or review.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 385.715.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. In Order No. 402, the Commission revised Rule 715 and required
that those filing an appeal of a denial of a motion to permit an
interlocutory appeal separately serve an additional copy of the appeal
on the Motions Commissioner.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Rules of Practice and Procedure; Interlocutory Appeals,
Order No. 402, 49 FR 39538 (October 9, 1984), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
30,604 (1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    5. The Commission is amending Rule 715(c)(1) to require persons
filing an interlocutory appeal to serve an additional copy of the
appeal of a denial of a motion to permit an interlocutory appeal on the
General Counsel.
    6. The Motions Commissioner has seven days after an appeal is filed
to make a determination as to whether or not the participant that has
filed the appeal has demonstrated extraordinary circumstances that
warrant Commission action.\4\ Within those seven days, the Motions
Commissioner must: (1) Obtain the participant's filing; (2) consider
whether the information presented is sufficiently complete; and (3)
determine whether extraordinary circumstances exist which make prompt
Commission review of the contested ruling necessary to prevent
detriment to the public interest or to prevent irreparable harm to a
person. If no extraordinary circumstances determination is made within
seven days after the appeal is filed and if the Motions Commissioner
has not otherwise provided for a different time period to receive and
consider additional information, the appeal is automatically denied
under Rule 715(c)(5).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.715.
    \5\ Id.; Rules of Practice and Procedure; Interlocutory Appeals,
Order No. 402, 49 FR 39538 (October 9, 1984), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
30,604 (1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. The Motions Commissioner, as noted, has only seven days to
decide whether an appeal meets the extraordinary circumstances
standard. Thus, it is important that the Motions Commissioner be made
aware of the appeal as quickly as possible.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 18 CFR 385.715; Rules of Practice and Procedure;
Interlocutory Appeals, Order No. 402, 49 FR 39538 (October 9, 1984),
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,604 (1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The Commission believes that serving a copy of the appeal on the
General Counsel, in addition to the Motions Commissioner, will better
ensure that the Motions Commissioner receives the appeal in sufficient
time to reach a decision.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    9. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require OMB to
approve certain information collection requirements imposed by agency
rule.\7\ However, this instant Final Rule does not contain any
information collection requirements and compliance with OMB regulations
is thus not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 5 CFR 1320.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Environmental Analysis

    10. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\8\ Issuance
of this Final Rule does not represent a major federal action having a
significant adverse effect on the human environment under the
Commission's regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969. Part 380 of the Commission's regulations lists exemptions
to the requirement to draft an Environmental Analysis or Environmental
Impact Statement. Included is an exemption for procedural, ministerial
or internal administrative actions.\9\ This rulemaking is exempt under
that provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.
] 30,783 (1987).
    \9\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    11. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \10\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This instant Final Rule concerns agency procedures. The Commission
certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact upon
participants in Commission proceedings. An analysis under the RFA is
not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Document Availability

    12. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
    13. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    14. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
VIII. Effective Date

    15. The Commission is issuing this rule as an instant Final Rule
without a period for public comment. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b), notice and
comment procedures are unnecessary where a rulemaking concerns only
agency procedure or practice, or where the agency finds that notice and
comment is unnecessary. This rule concerns only matters of agency
procedure and will not significantly affect regulated entities or the
general public.
    16. These regulations are effective September 14, 2009.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 385

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric utilities,
Penalties, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Part 385,
Chapter I,

Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 385--RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
1. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 16
U.S.C. 791a-825v, 2601-2645; 28 U.S.C. 2461; 31 U.S.C. 3701, 9701;
42 U.S.C. 7101-7352, 16441, 16451-16463; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App.
U.S.C. 1-85 (1988).

0
2. Section 385.715, paragraph (c)(1), is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  385.715  Interlocutory appeals to the Commission from rulings of
presiding officers (Rule 715).

* * * * *
    (c) Appeal of a presiding officer's denial of motion to permit
appeal. (1) If a motion to permit appeal is denied by the presiding
officer, the participant who made the motion may appeal the denial to
the Commissioner who is designated Motions Commissioner, in accordance
with this paragraph. For purposes of this section, ``Motions
Commissioner'' means the Chairman or a member of the Commission
designated by the Chairman to rule on motions to permit interlocutory
appeal. Any person filing an appeal under this paragraph must serve
separate copies of the appeal on the Motions Commissioner and on the
General Counsel by Express Mail or by hand delivery.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-19471 Filed 8-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7518-7522]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3004]

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

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 55

[EPA-R10-OAR-2011-0045; FRL-9265-3]

Outer Continental Shelf Air Regulations Consistency Update for
Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'').

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to update a portion of the Outer Continental
Shelf (``OCS'') Air Regulations. Requirements applying to OCS sources
located within 25 miles of States' seaward boundaries must be updated
periodically to remain consistent with the requirements of the
corresponding onshore area, as mandated by the Clean Air Act (``the
Act''). The portion of the OCS air regulations that is being updated
pertains to the requirements for OCS sources in the State of Alaska.
The intended effect of approving the OCS requirements for the State of
Alaska is to regulate emissions from OCS sources in accordance with the
requirements onshore. The change to the existing requirements discussed
below is proposed to be incorporated by reference into the Code of
Federal Regulations and is listed in the appendix to the OCS air
regulations.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket number EPA-R10-
OAR-2011-0045, by one of the following methods:
    A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments;
    B. E-Mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: Natasha Greaves, Federal and Delegated Air Programs Unit,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Suite 900, Mail Stop: AWT-107, Seattle, WA 98101;
    D. Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10,
Attn: Natasha Greaves (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington
98101, 9th Floor. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number. EPA-R10-OAR-
2011-0045. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'') or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI
or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should
not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through 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, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natasha Greaves, Federal and Delegated
Air Programs Unit, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop:
AWT-107, Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background Information
    Why is EPA taking this action?
II. EPA's Evaluation
    What criteria were used to evaluate rules submitted to update 40
CFR part 55?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal
Government
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Background Information

Why is EPA taking this action?

    On September 4, 1992, EPA promulgated 40 CFR part 55 (the OCS
rule),\1\ which established requirements to control air pollution from
OCS sources in order to attain and maintain federal and state ambient
air quality standards and to comply with the provisions of part C of
title I of the Act. Part 55 applies to all OCS sources offshore of the
States except those located in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87.5 degrees
longitude. Section 328 of the Act requires that for such sources
located within 25 miles of a State's seaward boundary, the requirements
shall be the same as would be applicable if the sources were located in
the corresponding onshore area (``COA''.) Because the OCS requirements
are based on onshore requirements, and onshore requirements may change,
section 328(a)(1) of the Act requires that EPA update the OCS
requirements as necessary to maintain consistency with onshore
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and the preamble to the final rule
promulgated September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further background
and information on the OCS regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 55.12 of the OCS rule, consistency reviews will
occur (1) At least annually; (2) upon receipt of a Notice of Intent
under section 40 CFR 55.4; or (3) when a state or local agency submits
a rule to EPA to be considered for incorporation by reference in part
55. This proposed action is being taken in response to the submittal of
a Notice of Intent on December 10, 2010 by Shell Offshore, Inc. Public
comments received in writing within 30 days of publication of this
proposed rule will be considered by EPA before publishing a final rule.
    Section 328(a) of the Act requires that EPA establish requirements
to control air pollution from OCS sources located within 25 miles of
States' seaward boundaries that are the same as onshore requirements.
To comply with this statutory mandate, EPA must incorporate applicable
onshore rules into part 55 as they exist onshore. This limits EPA's
flexibility in deciding which requirements will be incorporated into
part 55 and prevents EPA from making substantive changes to the
requirements it incorporates. As a result, EPA may be incorporating
rules into part 55 that do not conform to all of EPA's state
implementation plan (``SIP'') guidance or certain requirements of the
Act.
    Consistency updates may result in the inclusion of state or local
rules or regulations into part 55, even though the same rules may
ultimately be disapproved for inclusion as part of the SIP. Inclusion
in the OCS rule does not imply that a rule meets the requirements of
the Act for SIP approval, nor does it imply that the rule will be
approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP.

II. EPA's Evaluation

What criteria were used to evaluate rules to update 40 CFR part 55?

    In updating 40 CFR part 55, EPA reviewed the current COA rules for
consistency with part 55 to ensure that they are rationally related to
the attainment or maintenance of federal or state ambient air quality
standards or part C of title I of the Act, that they are not designed
expressly to prevent exploration and development of the OCS and that
they are applicable to OCS sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also evaluated
the rules to ensure they are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR 55.12
(e). In addition, EPA has excluded administrative or procedural
rules,\2\ and requirements that regulate toxics which are not related
to the attainment and maintenance of federal and state ambient air
quality standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Each COA which has been delegated the authority to implement
and enforce part 55, will use its administrative and procedural
rules as onshore. However, in those instances where EPA has not
delegated authority to implement and enforce part 55, as in Alaska,
EPA will use its own administrative and procedural requirements to
implement the substantive requirements. See 40 CFR 55.14 (c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'')
review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB
Review. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly
set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without
the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already
apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS
rules have created an adverse material effect. As required by section
328 of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS
requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The OMB has approved the information collection requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 55, and by extension this update to the rules,
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0249. The OMB Notice of
Action is dated January 15, 2009. The approval expires January 31,
2012.
    OMB's Notice of Action dated January 15, 2009 indicated that the
annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collection of
information under 40 CFR part 55 is estimated to average 112 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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR
part 9 and are identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA'') generally requires an
agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject
to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. This rule implements requirements
specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of
the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by
EPA. These OCS rules already apply in the COA, and EPA has no evidence
to suggest that these OCS rules have had a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. As required by section 328
of the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS
requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA. Therefore,
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``UMRA''),
Public Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to
assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the
UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million of more in any one year.
    Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    Today's proposed rule contains no Federal mandates (under the
regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in any one
year. This rule implements requirements specifically and explicitly set
forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act without the
exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. These OCS rules already apply
in the COA, and EPA has no evidence to suggest that these OCS rules
have created an adverse material effect. As required by section 328 of
the Clean Air Act, this action simply updates the existing OCS
requirements to make them consistent with rules in the COA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Orders 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255
(August 10, 1999)), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to
ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule implements
requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the Congress in
section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of any policy
discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act,
this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them consistent
with current COA requirements. This rule does not amend the existing
provisions within 40 CFR part 55 enabling delegation of OCS regulations
to a COA, and this rule does not require the COA to implement the OCS
rules. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249 (November 9, 2000)),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This rule does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes and thus does not have ``tribal
implications,'' within the meaning of Executive Order 13175. This rule
implements requirements specifically and explicitly set forth by the
Congress in section 328 of the Clean Air Act, without the exercise of
any policy discretion by EPA. As required by section 328 of the Clean
Air Act, this rule simply updates the existing OCS rules to make them
consistent with current COA requirements. In addition, this rule does
not impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments,
nor preempt tribal law. Consultation with Indian tribes is therefore
not required under Executive Order 13175. Nonetheless, in the spirit of
Executive Order 13175 and consistent with EPA policy to promote
communications between EPA and tribes, EPA specifically solicits
comments on this proposed rule from tribal officials.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885 (April 23, 1997)), applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because
it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866.
In addition, the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportional risk to children.

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

    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' [66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)] because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable laws
or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decided not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    As discussed above, this rule implements requirements specifically
and explicitly set forth by the Congress in section 328 of the Clean
Air Act, without the exercise of any policy discretion by EPA. As
required by section 328 of the Clean Air Act, this rule simply updates
the existing OCS rules to make them consistent with current COA
requirements. In the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
state to use voluntary consensus standards and in light of the fact
that EPA is required to make the OCS rules consistent with current COA
requirements, it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to
use voluntary consensus standards in this action. Therefore, EPA is not
considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards. EPA welcomes
comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specifically,
invites the public to identify potentially-applicable voluntary
consensus standards and to explain why such standards should be used in
this regulation.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer
Continental Shelf, Ozone, Particulate matter, Permits, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: February 2, 2011.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    Title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations, is proposed
to be amended as follows:

PART 55--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Section 328 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.) as
amended by Public Law 101-549.

    2. Section 55.14 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2)(i)(A) to
read as follows:

Sec.  55.14  Requirements that apply to OCS sources located within 25
miles of States' seaward boundaries, by State.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) State of Alaska Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources,
December 9, 2010.
* * * * *
    3. Appendix A to part 55 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1)
under the heading ``Alaska'' to read as follows:

Appendix A To Part 55--Listing of State and Local Requirements
Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, by State

* * * * *

Alaska

    (a) * * *
    (1) The following State of Alaska requirements are applicable to
OCS Sources, December 9, 2010, Alaska Administrative Code--
Department of Environmental Conservation. The following sections of
Title 18, Chapter 50:

Article 1. Ambient Air Quality Management

18 AAC 50.005. Purpose and Applicability of Chapter (effective 10/
01/2004)
18 AAC 50.010. Ambient Air Quality Standards (effective 04/01/2010)
18 AAC 50.015. Air Quality Designations, Classification, and Control
Regions (effective 12/09/2010) except (b)(1), (b)(3) and (d)(2)
Table 1. Air Quality Classifications
18 AAC 50.020. Baseline Dates and Maximum Allowable Increases
(effective 07/25/2008)
Table 2. Baseline Dates
Table 3. Maximum Allowable Increases
18 AAC 50.025. Visibility and Other Special Protection Areas
(effective 06/21/1998)
18 AAC 50.030. State Air Quality Control Plan (effective 10/29/2010)
18 AAC 50.035. Documents, Procedures, and Methods Adopted by
Reference (effective 04/01/2010)
18 AAC 50.040. Federal Standards Adopted by Reference (effective12/
09/2010) except (h)(2)
18 AAC 50.045. Prohibitions (effective 10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.050. Incinerator Emissions Standards (effective 07/25/
2008)
Table 4. Particulate Matter Standards for Incinerators
18 AAC 50.055. Industrial Processes and Fuel-Burning Equipment
(effective 12/09/2010) except (a)(3) through (a)(9), (b)(2)(A),
(b)(3) through (b)(6), (e) and (f)
18 AAC 50.065. Open Burning (effective 01/18/1997)
18 AAC 50.070. Marine Vessel Visible Emission Standards (effective
06/21/1998)
18 AAC 50.075. Wood-Fired Heating Device Visible Emission Standards
(effective 05/06/2009)
18 AAC 50.080. Ice Fog Standards (effective 01/18/1997)
18 AAC 50.085. Volatile Liquid Storage Tank Emission Standards
(effective 01/18/1997)
18 AAC 50.090. Volatile Liquid Loading Racks and Delivery Tank
Emission Standards (effective 07/25/2008)
18 AAC 50.100. Nonroad Engines (effective 10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.110. Air Pollution Prohibited (effective 05/26/1972)

Article 2. Program Administration

18 AAC 50.200. Information Requests (effective 10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.201. Ambient Air Quality Investigation (effective 10/01/
2004)

18 AAC 50.205. Certification (effective 10/01/2004) except (b)
18 AAC 50.215. Ambient Air Quality Analysis Methods (effective 10/
29/2010)
Table 5. Significant Impact Levels (SILs)
18 AAC 50.220. Enforceable Test Methods (effective 10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.225 Owner-Requested Limits (effective 12/09/2010) except
(c) through (g)
18 AAC 50.230. Preapproved Emission Limits (effective 07/01/2010)
except (d)
18 AAC 50.235. Unavoidable Emergencies and Malfunctions (effective
10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.240. Excess Emissions (effective 10/01/2004)
18 AAC 50.245. Air Episodes and Advisories (effective 10/01/2004)
Table 6. Concentrations Triggering an Air Episode

Article 3. Major Stationary Source Permits

18 AAC 50.301. Permit Continuity (effective 10/01/2004) except (b)
18 AAC 50.302. Construction Permits (effective 12/09/2010)
18 AAC 50.306. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permits
(effective 12/09/2010) except (c) and (e)
18 AAC 50.311. Nonattainment Area Major Stationary Source Permits
(effective 10/01/2004) except (c)
18 AAC 50.316. Preconstruction Review for Construction or
Reconstruction of a Major Source of Hazardous Air Pollutants
(effective 12/01/2004) except (c)
18 AAC 50.321. Case-By-Case Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(effective 12/01/04)
18 AAC 50.326. Title V Operating Permits (effective12/01/2004)
except (c)(1), (h), (i)(3), (j)(5), (j)(6), (k)(1), (k)(3), (k)(5),
and (k)(6)
18 AAC 50.345. Construction, Minor and Operating Permits: Standard
Permit Conditions (effective 11/09/2008)
18 AAC 50.346. Construction and Operating Permits: Other Permit
Conditions (effective 12/09/2010)
Table 7. Standard Operating Permit Condition

Article 4. User Fees

18 AAC 50.400. Permit Administration Fees (effective 07/01/2010)
except (a)(2), (a)(5), (j)(2) through (j)(5), (j)(8), and (j)(13)
18 AAC 50.403. Negotiated Service Agreements (effective 07/01/2010)
18 AAC 50.410. Emission Fees (effective 07/10/2010)
18 AAC 50.499. Definition for User Fee Requirements (effective 01/
29/2005)

Article 5. Minor Permits

18 AAC 50.502. Minor Permits for Air Quality Protection (effective
12/09/2010) except (b)(1) through (b)(3), (b)(5), (d)(1)(A) and
(d)(2)(A)
18 AAC 50.508. Minor Permits Requested by the Owner or Operator
(effective 12/07/2010)
18 AAC 50.510. Minor Permit--Title V Permit Interface (effective 12/
09/2010)
18 AAC 50.540. Minor Permit: Application (effective 12/09/2010)
18 AAC 50.542. Minor Permit: Review and Issuance (effective 12/09/
2010) except (a), (b), (c), and (d)
18 AAC 50.544. Minor Permits: Content (effective 12/09/2010)
18 AAC 50.560. General Minor Permits (effective 10/01/2004) except
(b)

Article 9. General Provisions

18 AAC 50.990. Definitions (effective 12/09/2010)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-3004 Filed 2-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P