                                  MEMORANDUM

Tetra Tech, Inc.
10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340
Fairfax, VA 22030
phone<PHONE_NUMBER>
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>

DATE: 		December 5, 2008

TO:			Paul Shriner and Jan Matuszko, EPA

FROM:		John Sunda, SAIC and Kelly Meadows, Tetra Tech

SUBJECT:	Estimation of 316(b) Phase II Facility Intake Screen Type Usage

This memorandum summarizes the distribution of Phase II facilities by cooling water intake technology type and waterbody type.  It also provides a breakdown of the number of Phase II facilities with Ristroph and Ristroph-type traveling screens by EPA Region as well as a summary of the type of screen used by facilities located on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers and associated tributaries.  This data is derived from both the short technical survey and the detailed technical survey.

Table 1 presents the distribution of Phase II facilities using specific intake technologies by waterbody type. The number of facilities are estimated based on data provided in both the short technical survey and detailed technical survey which are then extrapolated to a total of 536 Phase II facilities using facility-specific sample-weighting factors.

Table 1. Distribution of Phase II Facilities by Intake Technology and Waterbody Type

Source: EPA 2000.

Data regarding the use of specific types of screening technology is only available for the 227 facilities that completed the detailed technical survey.  Since the survey was conducted, 7 of these facilities have ceased operation and therefore are not included in these data summaries.  Of the 220 currently operating Phase II facilities that completed the detailed questionnaire:

 7 facilities reported using wedgewire screens
 6 facilities specifically reported "Ristroph" traveling screens; 7 additional facilities may qualify as having "Ristroph-type" traveling screens
 22 facilities reported having "Fish Buckets, Baskets, or Trays"
 22 facilities have a through-screen screen velocity of <= 0.5 fps

The above facility counts include facilities with at least one intake that met the criteria described. Data may not apply to all intakes at a facility.

Table 2 presents a geographical distribution by state and EPA Region of the 13 facilities with Ristroph and Ristroph-type screens.

Table 2. Geographical Distribution of Facilities with Ristroph-Type Traveling Screens
EPA Region
                                  Screen Type
                                     State
1

                                   Ristroph
                                      CT

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      CT

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      MA

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      MA

                                   Ristroph
                                      RI
2

                                   Ristroph
                                      NJ

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      NY
3
                                   Ristroph
                                      VA
6

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      LA

                                   Ristroph
                                      NM

                                 Ristroph-type
                                      TX
7
                                 Ristroph-type
                                      IA
9
                                   Ristroph
                                      HI
					Source: EPA 2000

Table 3 presents a summary of the type of screen technology used by facilities that withdraw water from the Mississippi River, Missouri River, and major tributaries that completed the detailed technical survey.  The list does not include intakes that use recirculating cooling systems.

Table 3. Summary of Screen Type Used by Facilities on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers and Major Tributaries
                                     River
                            Screen Technology Type

                             Horizontal Traveling
                              Vertical Traveling
                                   Dual Flow

                                    Intakes
                                  Facilities
                                    Intakes
                                  Facilities
                                    Intakes
                                  Facilities
                                  Mississippi
                                      15
                                       6
                                       8
                                       6
                                       0
                                       0
                                   Missouri
                                       1
                                       1
                                       8
                                       5
                                       1
                                       1
                                     Ohio
                                       0
                                       0
                                      16
                                       9
                                       0
                                       0
                                    Wabash
                                       0
                                       0
                                       2
                                       2
                                       0
                                       0
                                   Arkansas
                                       0
                                       0
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                   Illinois
                                       0
                                       0
                                       1
                                       1
                                       0
                                       0
                                     Total
                                      16
                                       7
                                      36
                                      24
                                       1
                                       1
Source: EPA 2000

References

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2000. Section 316(b) Industry Survey. Detailed Industry Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water Intake Structures and Industry Short Technical Questionnaire: Phase II Cooling Water Intake Structures, January, 2000 (OMB Control Number 2040-0213). Industry Screener Questionnaire: Phase I Cooling Water Intake Structures, January, 1999 (OMB Control Number 2040-0203).


MEMORANDUM TO: 2006 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan Docket, EPA Docket Number OW 2004 032 FROM: Meghan Kandle, ERG DATE: 9 August 2005 SUBJECT: Point Source Category Rankings by Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loads Calculated using 2002 PCS Data INTRODUCTION As part of the 2006 Effluent Guidelines Planning Process, EPA plans to investigate wastewater discharges of nutrients. The first step in this process is a screening level analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus discharges from existing point source categories. This memorandum describes the methodology ERG used to calculate nitrogen and phosphorus loads using 2002 Permit Compliance System ( PCS) data and rank point source categories in terms of total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads.

2002 PCS DATA ERG used annual loads of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds from PCSLoads2002 for this screening level analysis. EPA's 2005 Screening Level Analysis Report describes the development of PCSLoads2002 in more detail [ 1]. PCSLoads2002 uses 2002 PCS data and EPA's Effluent Data Statistics ( EDS) system to estimate annual pollutant loads. These data sources are described below:

° PCS is a mainframe database created by EPA to track permit, compliance, and enforcement status of facilities regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program under the Clean Water Act. PCS is the source of the pollutant discharge data and facility information used in the development of the PCSLoads2002 database.

° EDS is an EPA mainframe computer program that calculates annual pollutant loads using monthly measurement data reported in PCS.

Facilities report pollutants to PCS using parameter codes ( PRAM codes). Depending on the requirements of a facility's NPDES permit, the facility may report concentrations or loads of Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 2 the same pollutant to PCS using multiple parameters. To avoid double counting, EPA groups parameters that represent the same pollutant. EPA created the following parameter groups in PCSLoads2002 for nitrogen and phosphorus compounds:

° AMMON: Includes parameters for ammonia reported as NH 3, NH 4, or unionized ammonia;

° N: Includes parameters for ammonia reported as N;

° PHOSP: Includes parameters for phosphorus ( described below); and ° PO4: Includes parameters for phosphate.

The following example describes how applying the parameter grouping hierarchy helps to avoid double counting of loads. Six parameters may be used to report phosphorus: ( 1) total phosphorus, ( 2) phosphorus in total orthophosphate, ( 3) total organic phosphorus, ( 4) total recoverable phosphorus, ( 5) dissolved phosphorus, or ( 6) total soluble phosphorus as PO 4. Because total phosphorus includes dissolved phosphorus and soluble phosphorus, adding the measurements together overestimates the mass of phosphorus discharged from the facility. EPA's grouping hierarchy selects one parameter that best represents the total pollutant discharge and assigns it to the grouped parameter code named " PHOSP." Below is the " grouping" hierarchy EPA used to assign loads to the PHOSP parameter code if a facility reported multiple parameter codes for phosphorus:

The data for total phosphorus has precedence over the data for phosphorus in total orthophosphate;

If total phosphorus is not reported, the data for phosphorus in total orthophosphate has precedence over the data for total organic phosphorus;

If total phosphorus and phosphorus in total orthophosphate are not reported, the data for total organic phosphorus has precedence over the data for total recoverable phosphorus;

If total phosphorus, phosphorus in total orthophosphate, and total organic phosphorus are not reported, the data for total recoverable phosphorus has precedence over the data for dissolved phosphorus; and Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 3

If total phosphorus, phosphorus in total orthophosphate, total organic phosphorus, and total recoverable phosphorus are not reported the data for dissolved phosphorus has precedence over the data for soluble phosphorus ( as PO 4); and

The data for soluble phosphorus ( as PO 4) are used to represent total phosphorus in the absence of other phosphorus parameters.

Attachment 1 presents EPA's parameter grouping hierarchy for nitrogen and phosphorus compounds.

METHODOLOGY In addition to the multiple parameters described in the previous section, PCS data include discharges of nitrogen and phosphorus in various chemical forms. For example, nitrogen may be reported in its elemental form ( as N), Total Khjeldhal Nitrogen ( TKN), Organic Nitrogen, Ammonia as N, Ammonia as NH 3 or NH 4, Unionized Ammonia, nitrite or nitrate. EPA developed a series of hierarchies to select the appropriate combination of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds to calculate the total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads. These hierarchies are described in the following sections.

Total Nitrogen Load ERG calculated total nitrogen using one of the following equations:

° Equation 1: Total N Load = Total Nitrogen as N;

° Equation 2: Total N Load = TKN + Nitrite ( NO 2) + Nitrate ( NO 3); or ° Equation 3: Total N Load = Organic Nitrogen + Ammonia + Nitrite + Nitrate.

Nitrogen compounds that are reported as NH 3, NH 4, NO 2, or NO 3 need to be converted to N. Table 1 presents the conversion factors ERG used for nitrogen compounds. Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 4 1If loads of TKN were available, ERG used Equation 2 to calculate total nitrogen load even if loads were missing for nitrite or nitrate. Table 1. Conversion Factors for Nitrogen Compounds Nitrogen Compound Conversion Factor Ammonia as NH3 or NH4* 14 N / 17 NH3 Nitrite as NO2 14 N / 46 NO2 Nitrate as NO3 14 N / 62 NO3 * The conversion factor for ammonia assumes that the majority of ammonia loads in PCSLoads2002 are reported as NH3.

As discussed previously, loads for some ammonia parameters were grouped by EPA's grouping hierarchy and assigned to a grouped parameter code. Using the following hierarchy, ERG combined these grouped ammonia parameters with other non grouped nitrogen parameters to calculate the total nitrogen load:

° If the nitrogen load is reported as Total Nitrogen as N ( PRAM 00600), ERG used this parameter in Equation 1.

° If loads for PRAM 00600 were not available, and loads of TKN ( PRAM 00625) were available, ERG used Equation 21. ERG used the following PRAM codes for TKN, nitrite, and nitrate:

 TKN  PRAM 00625;

 Nitrite  If loads were available for Nitrite as N ( PRAM 00615), ERG used PRAM 00615. If loads were not available for 00615, ERG used data for Nitrite as NO 2 ( PRAM 71855) and converted the load to pounds of N.

 Nitrate  If loads of Nitrate as N ( PRAM 00620) were available, ERG used PRAM 00620. If loads of 00620 were not available, ERG used loads for Nitrate as NO 3 ( PRAM 71850) and converted the load to pounds of N.

° If loads for Total Nitrogen as N ( PRAM 00600) and TKN ( PRAM 00625) were not available, and loads of Organic Nitrogen ( PRAM 00605) were available, ERG Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 5 2If loads for organic nitrogen were available, ERG used Equation 3 to calculate total nitrogen load even if loads were missing for ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate. used Equation 32. ERG used the following PRAM codes for Organic Nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate:

 Organic Nitrogen  Organic Nitrogen as N ( PRAM 00605);

 Ammonia  If loads of Ammonia as N ( PRAM N) were available, ERG used PRAM N. If loads of PRAM N were not available, ERG used ammonia reported as NH 3, NH 4, or unionized ammonia ( PRAM AMMON) and converted the load to pounds of N.

 Nitrite  If loads were available for Nitrite as N ( PRAM 00615), ERG used PRAM 00615. If loads were not available for 00615, ERG used data for Nitrite as NO 2 ( PRAM 71855) and converted the load to pounds of N.

 Nitrate  If loads of Nitrate as N ( PRAM 00620) were available, ERG used PRAM 00620. If loads of 00620 were not available, ERG used loads for Nitrate as NO 3 ( PRAM 71850) and converted the load to pounds of N.

° If loads for Total Nitrogen as N ( PRAM 00600), TKN ( PRAM 00625), and Organic Nitrogen ( PRAM 00605) were not available, ERG summed any available loads for nitrite, nitrate, and ammonia. ERG used the following PRAM codes for ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate:

 Ammonia  If loads of Ammonia as N ( PRAM N) were available, ERG used PRAM N. If loads of PRAM N were not available, ERG used ammonia reported as NH 3, NH 4, or unionized ammonia ( PRAM AMMON) and converted the load to pounds of N.

 Nitrite  If loads were available for Nitrite as N ( PRAM 00615), ERG used PRAM 00615. If loads were not available for 00615, ERG used data for Nitrite as NO 2 ( PRAM 71855) and converted the load to pounds of N.

 Nitrate  If loads of Nitrate as N ( PRAM 00620) were available, ERG used PRAM 00620. If loads of 00620 were not available, ERG used loads for Nitrate as NO 3 ( PRAM 71850) and converted the load to pounds of N. Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 6 Total Phosphorus Load As discussed previously, loads for phosphorus parameters were grouped by EPA's grouping hierarchy and assigned to a grouped parameter code. As a result, PCSLoads2002 has only two parameters for phosphorus compounds. ERG used the following hierarchy to calculate total phosphorus load:

° If loads of phosphorus ( PRAM PHOSP) were available, ERG used the PRAM PHOSP load to represent total phosphorus. ERG assumed that the majority of the loads were reported as P and did not apply a conversion factor to calculate pounds of P.

° If loads of phosphorus ( PRAM PHOSP) were not available, ERG used loads of phosphate ( PRAM PO4). Assuming that the majority of the load is reported as PO 4, ERG multiplied the load by 31/ 95 to convert the load to pounds of P.

DATA QUALITY SCREENING ERG ranked point source categories based on their total nitrogen and total phosphorus discharges and reviewed the facility loads for the top six categories from each set of rankings. If a single facility accounted for more than 50 percent of the nitrogen or phosphorus load for its point source category, ERG determined that the facility was not representative of the rest of the category and deleted the facility's nitrogen or phosphorus load. ERG has not yet examined the sources of nitrogen and phosphorus discharges for these categories, and will conduct a more detailed quality check of the pollutant loads prior to the final Plan.

Table 2 lists the top facility for each of the top ranking point source categories for nitrogen discharges. As shown in Table 2, no facility contributes more than 50 percent of the total point source category nitrogen load. Therefore, ERG did not identify any facilities for deletion. Attachment 2 presents facility rankings for each point source category in Table 2. Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 7 Table 2. Top Nitrogen Dischargers for the Top Six Point Source Categories Point Source Category Top Facility NPDES Permit No. Top Facility Name Top Facility Location Total Nitrogen Load for Top Facility ( lb/ yr) % of Total Category Nitrogen Load Organic Chemical, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers TX0008788 BASF Corporation Freeport, TX 3,686,334 23%

Steam Electric Power Generation VA0004090 Dominion Virginia Power Surry, VA 3,554,784 29%

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard GA0003654 Brunswick Cellulose Brunswick, GA 1,352,040 16%

Meat and Poultry Processing NE0001392 Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc. Dakota City, NE 1,380,923 20%

Fertilizer Manufacturing MO0000817 River Cement Company Festus, MO 1,167,682 18%

Iron and Steel Manufacturing IN0000281 U. S. Steel, LLC Gary, IN 2,733,058 45%

Source: NutrientsAnalysis [ 2].

Table 3 lists the top facility for each of the top ranking point source categories for phosphorus discharges. As shown in Table 3, two facilities account for more than 50 percent of their category's discharge. These loads, which may be the result of a PCS error, are not representative of the rest of the category. Therefore, ERG deleted the phosphorus load for these two facilities and recalculated the point source category loads. Attachment 3 presents facility rankings for each point source category in Table 3. Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 8 Table 3. Top Phosphorus Dischargers for the Top Six Point Source Categories Point Source Category Top Facility NPDES Permit No. Top Facility Name Top Facility Location Total Phosphorus Load for Top Facility ( lb/ yr) % of Total Category Phosphorus Load Fertilizer Manufacturing MS0003115 Mississippi Phosphates Corp. Pascagoula, MS 5,798,186* 95%

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard VA0003646 Meadwestvaco Covington, VA 202,413 7%

Phosphate Manufacturing LA0004847 IMC Phosphates Co.  Uncle Sam Uncle Sam, LA 1,671,960* 66%

Mineral Mining and Processing FL0000655 PCS Phosphate White Springs, FL 888,860 44%

Steam Electric Power Generation VA0004090 Dominion Virginia Power Surry, VA 370,939 21%

Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers NJ0005100 Du Pont Deepwater, NJ 275,647 27%

Source: NutrientsAnalysis [ 2]. * Phosphorus loads were deleted from category for final rankings.

RESULTS Table 4 ranks point source categories in terms of total nitrogen load. Table 5 ranks point source categories in terms of total phosphorus load. The loads used to generate the phosphorus rankings do not include the two facilities contributing more than 50 percent of the phosphorus loads for their category as discussed previously.

Table 4. Point Source Category Rankings by Total Nitrogen Load 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Nitrogen Loads Total Annual Nitrogen Load ( lb/ yr) Average Nitrogen Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

414 Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers 132 15,848,055 120,061 423 Steam electric power generation 80 12,057,982 150,725 430 Pulp, paper, and paperboard 87 8,264,492 94,994 Memorandum Table 4 ( Continued) 9 August 2005 Page 9 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Nitrogen Loads Total Annual Nitrogen Load ( lb/ yr) Average Nitrogen Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

432 Meat and poultry products 43 6,867,338 159,706 418 Fertilizer manufacturing 22 6,481,434 294,611 420 Iron and steel manufacturing 49 6,134,919 125,202 436 Mineral mining and processing 19 4,363,121 229,638 419 Petroleum refining 99 3,053,278 30,841 415 Inorganic chemicals 32 2,598,056 81,189 457 Explosives 5 2,436,574 487,315 439 Pharmaceutical manufacturing 18 2,023,881 112,438 433 Metal Finishing 41 995,882 24,290 424 Ferroalloy manufacturing 1 974,265 974,265 421 Nonferrous metals manufacturing 16 887,069 55,442 422 Phosphate manufacturing 10 858,949 85,895 409 Sugar processing 15 669,432 44,629 NA Miscellaneous foods and beverages 5 640,472 128,094 NA Vinyl chloride and chlor alkali 12 589,624 49,135 410 Textile mills 45 554,457 12,321 463 Plastics molding and forming 6 278,299 46,383 425 Leather tanning and finishing 6 256,880 42,813 455 Pesticide chemicals 13 210,156 16,166 NA Drinking water treatment 8 205,600 25,700 429 Timber products processing 3 161,434 53,811 407 Canned and preserved fruits and vegetables processing 12 156,923 13,077 471 Nonferrous metals forming and metal powders 8 155,147 19,393 412 Concentrated animal feeding operations 1 141,960 141,960 408 Canned and preserved seafood processing 3 117,495 39,165 Memorandum Table 4 ( Continued) 9 August 2005 Page 10 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Nitrogen Loads Total Annual Nitrogen Load ( lb/ yr) Average Nitrogen Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

428 Rubber manufacturing 9 109,368 12,152 451 Concentrated aquatic animal production 4 72,289 18,072 444 Waste combustors ( commercial incinerators combusting hazardous waste) 8 58,759 7,345 445 Landfills 8 58,759 7,345 NA Airport deicing 1 57,376 57,376 469 Electrical and electronic components 3 50,482 16,827 413 Electroplating 17 43,876 2,581 440 Ore mining and dressing 10 40,392 4,039 406 Grain mills manufacturing 7 31,307 4,472 464 Metal molding and casting ( foundries) 3 24,161 8,054 NA Tobacco products processing 1 23,827 23,827 467 Aluminum forming 4 17,493 4,373 405 Dairy products processing 2 16,768 8,384 426 Glass manufacturing 2 16,537 8,269 437 Centralized waste treatment 2 15,999 8,000 NA Independent and stand alone laboratories 5 8,388 1,678 466 Porcelain enameling 2 5,024 2,512 468 Copper forming 1 621 621 NA Printing & publishing 1 550 550 460 Hospital 2 544 272 417 Soap and detergent manufacturing 1 262 262 Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 11 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Nitrogen Loads Total Annual Nitrogen Load ( lb/ yr) Average Nitrogen Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

443 Paving and roofing materials ( tars and asphalt) 1 166 166 461 Battery manufacturing 1 46 46 411 Cement manufacturing 1 27 27 434 Coal mining 1 0.37 0.37 Source: NutrientsAnalysis [ 2]. NA  Industry category does not have effluent limitations guidelines and standards established; therefore, there is no applicable 40 CFR Part. Memorandum 9 August 2005 Page 12 Table 5. Point Source Category Rankings by Total Phosphorus Load 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Phosphorus Loads Total Annual Phosphorus Load ( lb/ yr) Average Phosphorus Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

430 Pulp, paper and paperboard 87 2,861,224 32,888 436 Mineral mining and processing 18 2,022,989 112,388 423 Steam electric power generation 57 1,771,149 31,073 414 Organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers 57 1,038,920 18,227 432 Meat and poultry products 19 926,344 48,755 422 Phosphate manufacturing 11 858,692 78,063 407 Canned and preserved fruits and vegetables processing 8 529,548 66,194 439 Pharmaceutical manufacturing 10 478,812 47,881 418 Fertilizer manufacturing 6 313,581 52,264 410 Textile mills 36 174,507 4,847 455 Pesticide chemicals 5 102,969 20,594 433 Metal finishing 22 56,350 2,561 419 Petroleum refining 13 53,966 4,151 420 Iron and steel manufacturing 10 46,749 4,675 421 Nonferrous metals manufacturing 4 39,742 9,936 406 Grain mills manufacturing 3 35,363 11,788 409 Sugar processing 6 33,983 5,664 415 Inorganic chemicals 14 24,031 1,716 408 Canned and preserved seafood processing 2 18,642 9,321 454 Gum and wood chemicals 1 17,593 17,593 NA Vinyl chloride and chlor alkali 3 15,192 5,064 429 Timber products processing 2 13,597 6,799 451 Concentrated aquatic animal production 2 11,958 5,979 425 Leather tanning and finishing 3 11,221 3,740 Memorandum Table 5 ( Continued) 9 August 2005 Page 13 40 CFR Part Point Source Category # Facilities Reporting Phosphorus Loads Total Annual Phosphorus Load ( lb/ yr) Average Phosphorus Load per Facility ( lb/ yr)

463 Plastic molding and forming 3 10,790 3,597 NA Airport deicing 1 8,108 8,108 405 Dairy products processing 1 7,706 7,706 NA Drinking water treatment 4 7,350 1,837 443 Paving and roofing materials ( tars and asphalt) 2 7,133 3,567 467 Aluminum forming 4 5,221 1,305 469 Electrical and electronic components 2 5,212 2,606 413 Electroplating 7 4,978 711 440 Ore mining and dressing 3 3,754 1,251 NA Tobacco products processing 1 3,403 3,403 NA Independent and stand alone laboratories 3 2,345 782 444 Waste combustors ( commercial incinerators combusting hazardous waste) 3 2,296 765 445 Landfills 3 2,296 765 426 Glass manufacturing 1 1,416 1,416 NA Miscellaneous foods and beverages 3 692 231 471 Nonferrous metals forming and metal powders 3 601 200 457 Explosives 1 545 545 460 Hospital 2 50 25 437 Centralized waste treatment 1 0.78 0.78 Source: NutrientsAnalysis [ 2]. NA  Industry category does not have effluent limitations guidelines and standards established; therefore, there is no applicable 40 CFR Part.

REFERENCES 1. U. S. EPA. 2005 Screening Level Analysis. Washington, D. C. August 2005. Docket OW 2004 0032. Memorandum Table 5 ( Continued) 9 August 2005 Page 14 2. U. S. EPA. 2005. NutrientsAnalysis Database. Docket OW 2004 0032.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9574-9575]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3611]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-1085; FRL-8861-2; EPA ICR No. 2425.01; OMB Control No.
2070-new]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Use of Surveys in Developing Improved Labeling for
Insect Repellent Products

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request for a new Information Collection Request (ICR) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: ``Use of
Surveys in Developing Improved Labeling for Insect Repellent Products''
and identified by EPA ICR No. 2425.01 and OMB Control No. 2070-new.
Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is
soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information
collection.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 19, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-1085, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2010-1085. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov 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 regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the 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 docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. 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 in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of PRA, EPA specifically solicits
comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
    5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
    7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
    8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response.

You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

III. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Affected entities: Potential respondents affected by these
voluntary collection activities will be members of the general public
who have purchased and used insect repellent products.
    Title: Use of Surveys in Developing Improved Labeling for Insect
Repellent Products.
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2425.01, OMB Control No. 2070-new.
    ICR status: This ICR is for a new information collection activity.
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 title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after appearing
in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are
displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other
appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or
form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: EPA intends to initiate a new voluntary information
collection, a one-time Internet survey, for consumer research. The
goals of the Internet survey are to (1) identify the types of
information that users of insect repellents want on the label of an
insect repellent and (2) test four versions of efficacy marks, a
graphic that could be placed on the front label of an insect repellent,
that would standardize the presentation of information on how long the
insect repellent repels ticks and mosquitoes. For the first efficacy
mark viewed, participants would provide information on their
understanding of the efficacy mark, just as if they came across the
mark on a product label with no prior explanation of what the mark
could mean. Participants would rate all of the efficacy marks for
understandability and usefulness, and then indicate a preferred choice.
EPA would use this information to formulate decisions and policies
affecting future labeling of insect repellents. The ultimate goal of
this activity is to help the consumer to effectively use the
information on the label to select the insect repellent product most
likely to meet their needs and readily understand label instructions
regarding safe product use. This is a voluntary survey. One survey
would be conducted over the life of the ICR.
    The collected information could be used to revise insect repellent
product labels and to create other user friendly consumer information
materials. By enabling consumers to make better choices in regard to
purchasing and using products intended to protect their health, EPA
will more effectively carry out its mandate to protect the public from
unreasonable risks to human health. If any individuals or organizations
in possession of survey data that are similar to the survey activity
that EPA wishes to initiate and if the individual or organization is
willing to publicly share the methodology used, the results and
underlying raw data, contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15
minutes 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 which have subsequently changed; 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.
    The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is
only briefly summarized here:
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 3,000.
    Frequency of response: One time.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
On-line survey of approximately 15 minute duration.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 750 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $15,675. There is no cost for capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce
the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 10, 2011.
 Stephen A. Owens,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2011-3611 Filed 2-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


MEMORANDUM TO: 3848.241 file FROM: Craig Simons, DPRA DATE: November 1, 1999 SUBJ: Record of communication with Dan Jarvis, Eritech. (910 944 3355)

I called to ask about the minimum charge assumptions they experienced in handling F006. According to the 1995 BRS they generate about 49 tons per year. They recycle at least part to World Resources.

They have the recycler pick up the material, and consequently do not face any minimum charges. He said they are charged $300 per super sack. Their matierial contains large amounts of iron, about 20% copper and nickel. The recycler has several customers in the area, but he felt it would be a substantial cost savings if the material could be pickup in larger amounts. He noted that they frequently got only partial loads on their pickups in the area, increasing costs. However this he felt was incorporated into their charges.

I told him some other generators indicated lower charges– about $150 per sack. He surmised that situation was the result of more valuable metals in the F006 than is typical with theirs.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53359-53360]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21912]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0497; Airspace Docket No. 11-ASW-4]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Nashville, AR

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace at
Nashville, AR. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) at Howard County
Airport. The FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for SIAPs at the
airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before October 11,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2011-0497/Airspace Docket No. 11-
ASW-4, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2011-0497/
Airspace Docket No. 11-ASW-4.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface for new standard instrument approach
procedures at Howard County Airport, Nashville, AR. Controlled airspace
is needed for the safety and management of IFR operations at the
airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010 and effective September 15, 2010, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of

airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it
would establish controlled airspace at Howard County Airport,
Nashville, AR.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 18,
2010, and effective September 15, 2010, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW AR E5 Nashville, AR [New]

Howard County Airport, AR
    (Lat. 33[deg]59'48'' N., long. 93[deg]50'18'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Howard County Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on August 17, 2011.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2011-21912 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P