[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 7918]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-185, OMB Control No. 3235-0238]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Form N-6F

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    The title for the collection of information is ``Form N-6F (17 CFR
274.15), Notice of Intent to Elect to be Subject to Sections 55 through
65 of the Investment Company Act of 1940.'' The purpose of Form N-6F is
to notify the Commission of a company's intent to file a notification
of election to become subject to Sections 55 through 65 of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) (``1940
Act''). Certain companies may have to make a filing with the Commission
before they are ready to elect to be regulated as a business
development company.\1\ A company that is excluded from the definition
of ``investment company'' by Section 3(c)(1) because it has fewer than
one hundred shareholders and is not making a public offering of its
securities may lose such an exclusion solely because it proposes to
make a public offering of securities as a business development company.
Such company, under certain conditions, would not lose its exclusion if
it notifies the Commission on Form N-6F of its intent to make an
election to be regulated as a business development company. The company
only has to file a Form N-6F once.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A company might not be prepared to elect to be subject to
Sections 55 through 65 of the 1940 Act because its capital structure
or management compensation plan is not yet in compliance with the
requirements of those sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission estimates that on average approximately 4 companies
file these notifications each year. Each of those companies need only
make a single filing of Form N-6F. The Commission further estimates
that this information collection imposes burden of 0.5 hours, resulting
in a total annual PRA burden of 2 hours. Based on the estimated wage
rate, the total cost to the industry of the hour burden for complying
with Form N-6F would be approximately $736.
    The collection of information under Form N-6F is mandatory. The
information provided under the form is not kept confidential. 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 public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Cynthia
Roscoe, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Written comments and recommendations for the
proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of
publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find
this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under
30-day Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search
function.

    Dated: January 27, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-02122 Filed 2-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74349-74355]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26359]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0326; FRL-9693-01-R9]

Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State
Implementation Plans; Arizona; 2015 Ozone Infrastructure Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
partially approve and partially disapprove the Arizona state
implementation plan (SIP) as meeting the requirements of sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 2015 ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ``standards'').

Section 110(a)(1) requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for
the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by the EPA, and that the EPA act on such SIPs. We refer to
such SIPs as ``infrastructure'' SIPs because they are intended to
address basic structural SIP requirements for new or revised NAAQS
including, but not limited to, legal authority, regulatory structure,
resources, permit programs, monitoring, and modeling necessary to
assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. In addition to our
proposed partial approval and partial disapproval of Arizona's
infrastructure SIP, the EPA is proposing to approve rules in the
Arizona Revised Statutes and Pima County Code related to public
availability of emissions reports into the Arizona SIP. Lastly, the EPA
is proposing to reclassify regions in Arizona with respect to episode
plans for ozone under 40 CFR 51.150. The EPA is seeking public comments
on this proposed action and will accept comments from the public on
this proposal for the next 30 days.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by January 4, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2022-0326 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with disabilities
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Leers, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The EPA's Approach To Reviewing Infrastructure SIPs
II. Background
A. Statutory Framework
B. Regulatory Background
III. State Submittals
IV. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
A. Proposed Approvals and Partial Approvals
B. Proposed Partial Disapprovals
C. Incorporation of Rules Into Arizona's State Implementation Plan
D. Reclassification of Regions for Ozone Episode Plans
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The EPA's Approach To Reviewing Infrastructure SIPs

    The EPA is acting on SIP submittals from Arizona that address the
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Under section 110(a)(1), states
are required to submit infrastructure SIPs within three years (or such
shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the
promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any
revision thereof). The infrastructure SIP submittals required under
section 110(a)(1) are intended to provide for the ``implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submittals, and the
requirement to make the submittals is not conditioned upon the EPA
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific ``elements'' that each
such infrastructure SIP submittal must address.
    The EPA has historically referred to these SIP submittals made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) as infrastructure SIP submittals. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, the EPA uses the
term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submittal from
submittals that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under
the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment SIP'' submittals
to address the nonattainment planning requirements of CAA title I part
D, ``regional haze SIP'' submittals required by the EPA rule to address
the visibility protection requirements of section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program submittals to
address the permit requirements of CAA title I part D.
    CAA section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements
for infrastructure SIP submittals, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submittals. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\1\ The EPA therefore
believes that, while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is
unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
particular, the EPA believes that the list of required elements for
infrastructure SIP submittals provided in section 110(a)(2) contains
ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an
infrastructure SIP submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that
states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal
authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section
110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program
to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the
CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal
authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that
are triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for the
EPA to interpret some CAA section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2)
requirements with respect to infrastructure SIP submittals for a given
new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section
110(a)(2) requires that ``each'' SIP submittal must meet the list of
requirements therein, while the EPA has long noted that this literal
reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a
conflict with the nonattainment provisions in CAA title I part D, which
specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\2\ Section
110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements, and part D
addresses when attainment plan SIP submittals to address nonattainment
area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) requires the EPA
to

establish a schedule for submittal of such plans for certain pollutants
when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as
nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in
some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated.\3\
This ambiguity illustrates that, rather than apply all the stated
requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, the EPA
must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable for
a particular infrastructure SIP submittal. Another example of ambiguity
within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure
SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP
requirements in a single SIP submittal and whether the EPA must act
upon such SIP submittal in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1)
directs states to submit ``a plan'' to meet these requirements, the EPA
interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submittals
separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS.
If states elect to make such multiple SIP submittals to meet the
infrastructure SIP requirements, the EPA can elect to act on such
submittals either individually or in a larger combined action.\4\
Similarly, the EPA interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the
individual parts of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP
submittal for a given NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire
submittal. For example, the EPA has sometimes elected to act at
different times on various elements and subelements of the same
infrastructure SIP submittal.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g, 70 FR 25162, 25163-25165 (May 12, 2005),
explaining the relationship between the timing requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I).
    \3\ The EPA notes that this ambiguity within CAA section
110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D
set specific dates for submittal of certain types of SIP submittals
in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, for
example, that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for
submittal of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of
these specific dates are necessarily later than three years after
promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS.
    \4\ See, e.g., the EPA's final action approving the structural
PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately
to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 NSR rule for particulate
matter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5) at 78 FR 4339
(January 22, 2013), and the EPA's final action on the infrastructure
SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS at 78 FR 4337 (January 22,
2013).
    \5\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee made a SIP
revision to the EPA demonstrating that the State meets the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2). The EPA
proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) at 77 FR
3213 (January 23, 2012) and took final action at 77 FR 14976 (March
14, 2012). The EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all
other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's
December 14, 2007 submittal; see 77 FR 22533 (April 16, 2012) and 77
FR 42997 (July 23, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambiguities within CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also
arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submittal requirements for
different NAAQS. Thus, the EPA notes that not every element of section
110(a)(2) would be relevant, as relevant, or relevant in the same way,
for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant infrastructure SIP
submittals for each NAAQS therefore could be different. For example,
the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its
infrastructure SIP submittal for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could
be very different for different pollutants, for example, because the
content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP submittal to meet
this element might be very different for an entirely new NAAQS than for
a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure
ambient levels of new indicator species for the new NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA notes that interpretation of CAA section 110(a)(2) is also
necessary when the EPA reviews other types of SIP submittals required
under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submittals, the
EPA also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section
110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submittals.
For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP
submittals required by part D meet the ``applicable requirements'' of
section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan SIP submittals
must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) regarding
enforceable emissions limits and control measures and section
110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By
contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submittals required by
part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that
pertains to the air quality prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD
does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated
nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this
example illustrates, each type of SIP submittal may implicate some
elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others.
    Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language
of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), the EPA believes that it is
appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1)
and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP
submittal. In other words, the EPA assumes that Congress could not have
intended that each and every SIP submittal, regardless of the NAAQS in
question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant,
would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same
way. Therefore, the EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews
infrastructure SIP submittals against the list of elements in section
110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that
particular NAAQS.
    Historically, the EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and
applied to individual SIP submittals for particular elements.\7\ The
EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September
13, 2013 (``2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance'').\8\ The EPA developed
this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for
infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance,
the EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP
submittals to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years
of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. The EPA also made
recommendations about many specific subsections of CAA section
110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP
submittals.\9\ The guidance also discusses the substantively important
issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2).
Significantly, the EPA

interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure
SIP submittals need to address certain issues and need not address
others. Accordingly, the EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submittal
for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section
110(a)(2), as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires the
EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for
infrastructure SIP submittals. The CAA directly applies to states
and requires the submittal of infrastructure SIP submittals,
regardless of whether or not the EPA provides guidance or
regulations pertaining to such submittals. The EPA elects to issue
such guidance in order to assist states, as appropriate.
    \8\ Memorandum dated September 13, 2013, from Stephen D. Page,
Director, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, U.S. EPA,
Subject: ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2).''
    \9\ The 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance did not make
recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submittals to
address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). The EPA issued the guidance
shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C.
Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which
had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In
light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, the EPA
elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither
binding nor required by statute, whether the EPA elects to provide
guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state's CAA
obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element
of section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submittals. Under this
element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128,
which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement
orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, the
EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submittals to ensure that the state's
SIP appropriately addresses the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance
explains the EPA's interpretation that there may be a variety of ways
by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory
requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state's
permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and
enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of
an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the
substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in the
EPA's evaluation of infrastructure SIP submittals because section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the
provisions of section 128.
    As another example, the EPA's review of infrastructure SIP
submittals with respect to the PSD program requirements in CAA sections
110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) focuses on the
structural PSD program requirements contained in CAA title I part C and
the EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include
provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated
sources and regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHG).
By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include
provisions that are not required under the EPA's regulations at 40 CFR
51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the
option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with
respect to the 2012 NAAQS for particulate matter of 2.5 micrometers or
less (PM2.5). Accordingly, the latter optional provisions
are types of provisions the EPA considers irrelevant in the context of
an infrastructure SIP action.
    For other CAA section 110(a)(2) elements, however, the EPA's review
of a state's infrastructure SIP submittal focuses on assuring that the
state's SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section
110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a
program to regulate new minor sources. Thus, the EPA evaluates whether
the state has a SIP-approved minor NSR program and whether the program
addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of
acting on an infrastructure SIP submittal, however, the EPA does not
think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision
of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the
existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and the
EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs.
    With respect to certain other issues, the EPA does not believe that
an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submittal is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) existing provisions
related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA
policies addressing such excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions
related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that
may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to
SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not
requiring further approval by the EPA; and (iii) existing provisions
for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of
the EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule.'' \10\ Thus, the EPA believes
it may approve an infrastructure SIP submittal without scrutinizing the
totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions
and may approve the submittal even if it is aware of such existing
provisions.\11\ It is important to note that the EPA's approval of a
state's infrastructure SIP submittal should not be construed as
explicit or implicit reapproval of any existing potentially deficient
provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR
32526 (June 13, 2007).
    \11\ By contrast, the EPA notes that if a state were to include
a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submittal that contained a
legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions
during SSM events, then the EPA would need to evaluate that
provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA
requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's approach to reviewing infrastructure SIP submittals is to
identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that
submittal. The EPA believes that this approach to the review of a
particular infrastructure SIP submittal is appropriate because it would
not be reasonable to read the general requirements of CAA section
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all
requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the
purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new
or revised NAAQS when the EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure
SIP submittal. The EPA believes that a better approach is for states
and the EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2)
most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
    For example, the 2013 Infrastructure SIP Guidance gives simpler
recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS
pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) because carbon monoxide does not affect visibility.
As a result, an infrastructure SIP submittal for any future new or
revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to
address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    Finally, the EPA believes that its approach with respect to
infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues
and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing
SIPs. These other statutory tools allow the EPA to take appropriately
tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged
SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes the EPA to issue a ``SIP
call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate
interstate transport, or to otherwise

comply with the CAA.\12\ Section 110(k)(6) authorizes the EPA to
correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP
submittals.\13\ Significantly, the EPA's determination that an action
on a state's infrastructure SIP submittal is not the appropriate time
and place to address all potential existing SIP deficiencies does not
preclude the EPA's subsequent reliance on provisions in section
110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to correct those deficiencies
at a later time. For example, although it may not be appropriate to
require a state to eliminate all existing inappropriate director's
discretion provisions in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP
submittal, the EPA believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the
statutory bases that the EPA relies upon in the course of addressing
such deficiency in a subsequent action.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For example, the EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of
excess emissions during SSM events. See 76 FR 21639 (April 18,
2011).
    \13\ The EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past
actions on SIP submittals related to PSD programs. See Limitation of
Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans; Final Rule, 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). The EPA has
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR
34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16,
2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3,
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
    \14\ See, e.g., the EPA's disapproval of a SIP submittal from
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342, 42344 (July 21, 2010)
(proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 FR
4540 (January 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Background

A. Statutory Framework

    As described in the previous section, CAA section 110(a)(1)
requires states to make a SIP submittal within three years after the
promulgation of a new or revised primary NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)
includes a list of specific elements that each infrastructure SIP
submittal must include. These infrastructure SIP elements required by
section 110(a)(2) are as follows:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control
measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): Interstate pollution transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and international
pollution abatement.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority,
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and
reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government
officials, public notification, PSD, and visibility protection.
     Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submittal
of modeling data.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by
affected local entities.
    Two elements identified in CAA section 110(a)(2) are not governed
by the three-year submittal deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These two elements are section
110(a)(2)(C), to the extent that it refers to permit programs required
under part D (nonattainment NSR), and section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining
to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D. As a result, this
action does not address infrastructure requirements for the
nonattainment NSR portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) or the entirety of
section 110(a)(2)(I). Additionally, this action does not address the
interstate transport requirements under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
referred to as ``prongs 1 and 2'' of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), or the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) pertaining to interference
with visibility protection in other states, referred to as ``prong 4''
of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). The EPA proposed action on Arizona's SIP
with respect to prongs 1 and 2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS in a prior rulemaking,\15\ and the EPA will take action on
Arizona's SIP with respect to prong 4 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in a
separate, future rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 87 FR 37776 (June 24, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Regulatory Background

    In 2015, the EPA promulgated revised NAAQS for 8-hour ozone,
triggering a requirement for states to submit infrastructure SIPs. The
2015 ozone NAAQS revised the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS by lowering the
primary and secondary 8-hour ozone standards from 75 parts per billion
(ppb) to 70 ppb.

III. State Submittals

    The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) submitted
two SIP revisions to address the infrastructure SIP requirements in CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On September
24, 2018, ADEQ submitted the ``Arizona State Implementation Plan
Revision under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the
2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (``2018 Ozone I-SIP
submittal'').\16\ On February 10, 2022, ADEQ submitted the ``State
Implementation Plan Revision: Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2) for the
2012 Fine Particulate & 2015 Ozone NAAQS'' (``2022 I-SIP
supplement'').\17\ The 2018 Ozone I-SIP submittal and the portion of
the 2022 I-SIP supplement addressing the 2015 Ozone NAAQS collectively
address the infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS as
described by this proposed rule. We refer to them collectively herein
as ``Arizona's Ozone I-SIP submittals.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Letter dated September 24, 2018, from Timothy S. Franquist,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Michael Stoker, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``Submittal of the Arizona
State Implementation Plan Revision under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.''
    \17\ Letter dated February 10, 2022, from Daniel Czecholinski,
Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Martha Guzman, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX, Subject: ``Submittal of the Arizona
State Implementation Plan Revision under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(2) for the 2012 Fine Particulate and the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We find that Arizona's Ozone I-SIP submittals meet the procedural
requirements for public participation under CAA section 110(a)(2) and
40 CFR 51.102. We also find that they meet the applicable completeness
criteria in Appendix V to 40 CFR part 51. We are proposing to act on
these submittals with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS except for those
portions of the 2018 Ozone I-SIP Submittal addressing prongs 1, 2, and
4 of the interstate transport requirements under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i). We are not taking action on the portions of the 2022
I-SIP supplement addressing the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in this
rulemaking.

IV. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

    We have evaluated Arizona's Ozone I-SIP submittals and the existing
provisions of the Arizona SIP for compliance with the infrastructure
SIP requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)

and the applicable regulations in 40 CFR part 51 (``Requirements for
Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of State Implementation Plans'').
The technical support document (TSD) for this rulemaking is available
in the docket and includes our evaluation for these infrastructure SIP
elements as well as our evaluation of various statutory and regulatory
provisions identified and submitted by Arizona.

A. Proposed Approvals and Partial Approvals

    Based on the evaluation presented in this notice and in the
accompanying TSD, the EPA proposes to approve Arizona's Ozone I-SIP
submittals with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the following CAA
requirements. Proposed partial approvals are indicated by the
parenthetical ``(in part).''
     110(a)(2)(A)--Emission limits and other control measures.
     110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
     110(a)(2)(C)--Program for enforcement of control measures
and regulation of new stationary sources (in part).
     110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Interference with maintenance, or
``prong 3'' (in part).
     110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate pollution abatement, CAA
section 126 (in part).
     110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--International pollution abatement, CAA
section 115.
     110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate resources and authority, conflict
of interest, and oversight of local governments and regional agencies.
     110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
     110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency episodes.
     110(a)(2)(H)--Consultation with government officials.
     110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation with government officials,
public notification, PSD, and visibility protection (in part).
     110(a)(2)(K)--Air quality modeling and submission of
modeling data.
     110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting fees.
     110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
    Details about the partial approvals noted in this section are
provided in Section IV.B of this notice regarding proposed partial
disapprovals. The EPA is taking no action on prongs 1, 2, and 4 of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in this rulemaking. In addition to our proposed
partial approval and partial disapproval of Arizona's infrastructure
SIP, we are proposing to approve Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) 49-432
and Pima County Code (PCC) 17.24.010 for incorporation into the Arizona
SIP.

B. Proposed Partial Disapprovals

    The EPA proposes to partially disapprove Arizona's Ozone I-SIP
submittals with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the following Clean
Air Act requirements.
     110(a)(2)(C)--Program for enforcement of control measures
and regulation of new stationary sources (in part).
     110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Interference with maintenance, or
``prong 3'' (in part).
     110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate pollution abatement, CAA
section 126 (in part).
     110(a)(2)(J)--PSD and visibility protection (in part).
    The EPA is proposing to partially disapprove Arizona's Ozone I-SIP
submittals with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS for these CAA
requirements due to deficiencies with PSD permitting of GHG in all
permitting jurisdictions in Arizona and with PSD permitting of all NSR-
regulated pollutants in Pima County. The EPA's proposed disapprovals
apply only to the portions of these requirements that relate to PSD
permitting programs in Arizona, and they apply only with respect to PSD
permitting of GHG in all areas of Arizona and with respect to PSD
permitting of all NSR-regulated pollutants in Pima County.
    Arizona's SIP does not fully satisfy the statutory and regulatory
requirements for PSD permit programs under CAA title I, part C, and
thus Pima County currently implements the federal PSD program in 40 CFR
52.21 for all regulated NSR pollutants, pursuant to a delegation
agreement with the EPA, and all Arizona jurisdictions implement the
federal PSD program in 40 CFR 52.21, pursuant to delegation agreements
with the EPA, for GHG because Arizona is prohibited by state law from
regulating emissions of GHG. Although the Arizona SIP remains deficient
with respect to PSD permitting for certain pollutants in certain areas
of Arizona as described, these deficiencies are adequately addressed in
both areas by existing federal implementation plans (FIPs). If
finalized, these partial disapprovals of Arizona's SIP would not create
any new consequences for Arizona, the relevant county agencies, or the
EPA, as Arizona and the county agencies already implement the EPA's
federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21, pursuant to delegation agreements,
for all regulated NSR pollutants. If finalized, these partial
disapprovals would also not result in any offset or highway sanctions,
because sanctions are not triggered by disapprovals of infrastructure
SIPs submittals.

C. Incorporation of Rules Into Arizona's State Implementation Plan

    Under CAA section 110(a)(2)(F), SIPs must require the installation
and maintenance of emissions monitoring by stationary sources, periodic
emissions reports from such sources, and correlation of such reports
with applicable emissions limitations or standards established under
the CAA. The stationary source emissions reports required pursuant to
section 110(a)(2)(F) must be made available at reasonable times for
public inspection.
    The 2022 I-SIP supplement includes the submittal of the following
two rules for incorporation into the Arizona SIP to meet the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS:
Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) 49-432 and Pima County Code (PCC)
17.24.010. Specifically, ARS 49-432 and PCC 17.24.010 address the
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(F) requiring the public availability of
stationary source emissions reports. ARS 49-432 requires that ADEQ make
available to the public any records, reports, or information obtained
pursuant to ARS Title 49, Chapter 3, ``AIR QUALITY.'' Similarly, PCC
17.24.010 requires that the Pima County Department of Environmental
Quality make available to the public any records, reports, or
information obtained pursuant to PCC Title 17, Chapter 17.24,
``EMISSION SOURCE RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING.'' ARS 49-432 and PCC
17.24.010 each include exemptions to public availability requirements
related to business confidentiality, ongoing criminal investigations,
and civil enforcement actions.
    We find that ARS 49-432 and PCC 17.24.010 provide for the public
availability of stationary source emissions reports consistent with the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(F). We therefore propose to
approve ARS 49-432 and PCC 17.24.010 into the Arizona SIP. Arizona's
Ozone I-SIP submittals include numerous other state and county
provisions and a narrative description of how these provisions satisfy
CAA section 110(a)(2)(F). We are proposing to approve Arizona's SIP as
meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F); our evaluation of the
provisions cited in the Arizona's Ozone I-SIP submittals against the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) is included in the TSD for this
proposed rule.

D. Reclassification of Regions for Ozone Episode Plans

    The priority thresholds for classification of air quality control

regions are listed at 40 CFR 51.150, and the specific classifications
of air quality control regions in Arizona are listed at 40 CFR 52.121.
Consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR 51.153, reclassification of an
air quality control region must rely on the most recent three years of
air quality data. Under 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152, regions classified
Priority I, IA, or II are required to have SIP-approved emergency
episode contingency plans, while those classified Priority III are not
required to have plans. We interpret 40 CFR 51.153 as establishing the
means for states to review air quality data and request a higher or
lower classification for any given region and as providing the
regulatory basis for the EPA to reclassify such regions, as
appropriate, under the authorities of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(G) and
301(a)(1).
    The priority classification threshold for ozone under 40 CFR 51.150
is 195 micrograms per cubic meter, equivalent to 0.10 parts per million
(ppm), calculated as a one-hour maximum. Regions with one-hour ozone
concentrations greater than 0.10 ppm are classified as Priority I for
ozone under 40 CFR 51.150. All other regions are classified as Priority
III for ozone. Arizona's regional priority classifications for ozone
under 40 CFR 51.150 are located at 40 CFR 52.121. Currently, the
Maricopa Intrastate air quality control region (AQCR) and the Pima
Intrastate AQCR are classified as Priority I for ozone.
    Air quality data from 2019-2021 indicate that the maximum one-hour
ozone concentrations monitored in two Arizona regions exceed the
Priority I threshold for one-hour ozone. The maximum one-hour ozone
concentration measured in the Maricopa Intrastate AQCR in this period
was 0.14 ppm; the maximum one-hour ozone concentration measured in the
Central Arizona Intrastate AQCR in this period was 0.11 ppm. We are
proposing to retain the classification of the Maricopa Intrastate AQCR
as Priority I and to reclassify the Central Arizona Intrastate AQCR
from Priority III to Priority I for ozone.
    Air quality data from 2019-2021 also indicate that the maximum one-
hour ozone concentration monitored in the Pima Intrastate AQCR does not
exceed the Priority I threshold for one-hour ozone. The maximum one-
hour ozone concentration monitored in this region from 2019-2021 was
0.09 ppm. We are therefore proposing to reclassify the Pima Intrastate
AQCR from Priority I to Priority III for ozone.
    If finalized, the reclassification of the Central Arizona
Intrastate AQCR from Priority III to Priority I for ozone will not
generate new requirements for Arizona to submit an emergency episode
contingency plans for this area because the provisions in Arizona's
existing emergency episode plan apply uniformly statewide. Thus, our
proposed reclassification of the Central Arizona Intrastate AQCR for
ozone also does not affect our proposed approval of the Arizona SIP
with respect CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state
plans as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
    The State did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal. There is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994) of achieving environmental justice for people
of color, low-income populations, and indigenous peoples.
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: November 17, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2022-26359 Filed 12-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 240 (Friday, December 17, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71637-71638]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27396]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9328-01-ORD]

Human Studies Review Board (HSRB); Notification of Public
Meetings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research
and Development (ORD), gives notice of the

2022 public meetings of the Human Studies Review Board (HSRB). The HSRB
provides advice, information, and recommendations on issues related to
scientific and ethical aspects of third-party human subjects' research
that are submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) to be used
for regulatory purposes.

DATES: Four three-day virtual public meetings will be held on:
    1. January 25-27, 2022;
    2. April 26-28, 2022;
    3. July 19-21, 2022; and
    4. October 25-27, 2022.
    Meetings will be held each day from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time.
For each meeting, separate subsequent follow-up meetings are planned
for the HSRB to finalize reports from the three-day meetings. These
meetings will be held from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern time on the
following dates: March 17, 2022; June 16, 2022; September 14, 2022; and
December 14, 2022.

ADDRESSES: These meetings are open to the public and will be conducted
entirely virtually and by telephone. For detailed access information
and meeting materials please visit the HSRB website: https://www.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wished to
receive further information should contact the HSRB Designated Federal
Official (DFO), Tom Tracy, via phone/voicemail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via
email at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The HSRB is a Federal advisory committee operating in accordance
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act 5 U.S.C. App.2 section 9. The
HSRB provides advice, information, and recommendations on issues
related to scientific and ethical aspects of third-party human subjects
research that are submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)
to be used for regulatory purposes.
    Meeting access: These meetings will be open to the public. The full
agenda with access information and meeting materials will be available
seven calendar days prior to the start of each meeting at the HSRB
website: https://www.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board. For
questions on document availability, or if you do not have access to the
internet, consult with the DFO, Tom Tracy listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Special Accommodations. For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, or to request accommodation of a
disability, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT at least 10 days prior to each meeting to give EPA as much time
as possible to process your request.

How may I participate in this meeting?

    The HSRB encourages the public's input. You may participate in
these meetings by following the instructions in this section.
    1. Oral comments. To pre-register to make oral comments, please
contact the DFO, Tom Tracy, listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Requests to present oral comments during the meetings will be
accepted up to Noon Eastern Time, seven calendar days prior to each
meeting date. To the extent that time permits, interested persons who
have not pre-registered may be permitted by the HSRB Chair to present
oral comments during the meetings at the designated time on the agenda.
Oral comments before the HSRB are generally limited to five minutes per
individual or organization. If additional time is available, further
public comments may be possible.
    2. Written comments. For the Board to have the best opportunity to
review and consider your comments as it deliberates, you should submit
your comments prior to the meetings via email by Noon Eastern Time,
seven calendar days prior to each meeting date. If you submit comments
after these dates, those comments will be provided to the HSRB members,
but you should recognize that the HSRB members may not have adequate
time to consider your comments prior to their discussion. You should
submit your comments to the DFO, Tom Tracy listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. There is no limit on the length of written
comments for consideration by the HSRB.
    Topics for discussion. The agenda and meeting materials will be
available seven calendar days in advance of each meeting at https://www.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board.
    Meeting minutes and final reports. Minutes of these meetings,
summarizing the topics discussed and recommendations made by the HSRB,
will be released within 90 calendar days of each meeting. These minutes
will be available at https://www.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board. In addition, information regarding the HSRB's Final Reports,
will be found at https://www.epa.gov/osa/human-studies-review-board or
can be requested from Tom Tracy listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

Mary Ross,
Director, Office of Science Advisor, Policy and Engagement.
[FR Doc. 2021-27396 Filed 12-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13402-13403]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5629]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9279-5; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0664]

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS); Announcement of
Availability of Literature Searches for IRIS Assessments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Announcement of availability of literature searches for IRIS
assessments; request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing
the availability of literature searches for cobalt (CASRN 7440-48-4)
and inorganic cobalt compounds, vanadium pentoxide (CASRN 1314-62-1),
vinyl acetate (CASRN 108-05-4), and Libby Amphibole asbestos. EPA is
requesting scientific information on health effects that may result
from exposure to these chemical substances. EPA's IRIS is a human
health assessment program that evaluates quantitative and qualitative
risk information on effects that may result from exposure to specific
chemical substances found in the environment.

DATES: EPA will accept information related to the specific substances
included herein as well as any other compounds being assessed by the
IRIS Program. Please submit any information in accordance with the
instructions provided below.

ADDRESSES: Please submit relevant scientific information identified by
docket ID number EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0664, online at http://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred method); by e-mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>mailed to Office of Environmental Information (OEI)
Docket (Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery
or courier to EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Information on a disk or CD-
ROM should be formatted in Word or as an ASCII file, avoiding the use
of special characters and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to
the mailing address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the IRIS program,
contact Karen Hammerstrom, IRIS Program Deputy Director, National
Center for Environmental Assessment, (mail code: 8601D), Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile: (703) 347-
8689; or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general questions about access to IRIS, or the content of IRIS,
please call the IRIS Hotline at<PHONE_NUMBER> or send electronic mail
inquiries to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EPA's IRIS is a human health assessment program that evaluates
quantitative and qualitative risk information on effects that may
result from exposure to specific chemical substances found in the
environment. Through the IRIS Program, EPA provides the highest quality
science-based human health assessments to support the Agency's
regulatory activities. The IRIS database contains information for more
than 540 chemical

substances that can be used to support the first two steps (hazard
identification and dose-response evaluation) of the risk assessment
process. When supported by available data, IRIS provides oral reference
doses (RfDs) and inhalation reference concentrations (RfCs) for chronic
noncancer health effects as well as assessments of potential
carcinogenic effects resulting from chronic exposure. Combined with
specific exposure information, government and private entities use IRIS
to help characterize public health risks of chemical substances in a
site-specific situation and thereby support risk management decisions
designed to protect public health.
    This data call-in is a step in the IRIS process. As literature
searches are completed, the results will be posted on the IRIS Web site
(http://www.epa.gov/iris). The public is invited to review the
literature search results and submit additional information to EPA.

Request for Public Involvement in IRIS Assessments

    EPA is soliciting public involvement in assessments on the IRIS
agenda. While EPA conducts a thorough literature search for each
chemical substance, there may be unpublished studies or other primary
technical sources that are not available through the open literature.
EPA would appreciate receiving scientific information from the public
during the information gathering stage for the assessments listed in
this notice or any other assessments on the IRIS agenda. Interested
persons may provide scientific analyses, studies, and other pertinent
scientific information. While EPA is primarily soliciting information
on new assessments, the public may submit information on any chemical
substance at any time.
    EPA is announcing the availability of additional literature
searches on the IRIS Web site (http://www.epa.gov/iris). The public is
invited to review the literature search results and submit additional
information to EPA. Literature searches are now available for cobalt
(CAS No. 7440-48-4) and inorganic cobalt compounds, vanadium pentoxide
(CASRN 1314-62-1), vinyl aceate (108-05-4), and Libby Amphibole
asbestos at http://www.epa.gov/iris under ``IRIS Agenda and Literature
Searches.'' The literature search for Libby Amphibole asbestos
encompasses publicly available and peer reviewed literature that is
specific to Libby Amphibole asbestos. EPA would appreciate receiving
scientific information from the public that is specific to Libby
Amphibole asbestos, rather than general asbestos, in an effort to
support the development of an IRIS human health assessment specific for
Libby Amphibole asbestos (CASRN 1332-21-4). Instructions on how to
submit information are provided below under General Information.

General Information

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-
0664 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket,
(Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center's Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide information
by mail or hand delivery, please submit one unbound original with pages
numbered consecutively, and three copies of the comments. For
attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the main
text, and submit an unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2007-0664. It is EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in
the public docket without change and to make the comments available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless a comment includes information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the
EPA Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: February 28, 2011.
Darrel A. Winner,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2011-5629 Filed 3-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P