SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG)

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The final rule for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) Site Remediation was published in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart GGGGG, and promulgated on October 8, 2003.  These standards
apply to site remediation activities that use certain types of equipment
to clean up materials containing organics that potentially could be
released to the atmosphere as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP).  These
site remediation activities can potentially be conducted at any facility
where materials containing organic HAP currently are or have been
stored, processed, treated, or otherwise managed at the facility.  The
types of businesses most likely to be subject to the rule include, but
are not limited to, organic liquid storage terminals, petroleum
refineries, chemical manufacturing facilities, and manufacturing
facilities using organic materials.

A site remediation involves a clean up of hazardous substances in order
to protect human health and the environment.  These hazardous substances
could potentially contaminate soil, groundwater, and the air.  Owners
and operators of the facilities subject to part 63, subpart GGGGG are
required to perform this information collection.

Affected owners and operators subject to the rule are required to
install and operate air emission controls and meet certain work practice
standards.  To demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the
rule requirements, affected owners and operators need to collect
information to meet specific monitoring, inspection, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements.

The information collection requirements for the site remediation NESHAP
are summarized in Section 4(b).

	In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities.  They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative.  These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all
sources subject to NESHAP.

	Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
five years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports,
and records.  All reports are sent to the delegated state or local
authority.  In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the
reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regional office.

	Based on our previous consultations with the industry, we estimate that
there are approximately 286 facilities subject to this regulation and
each facility has only one respondent (owner/operator).  The Agency
estimates that there has not been any growth in the industry since the
previous Information Collection Request (ICR).  The respondents submit
the reports to the permitting authority on a semiannual basis as
required by the regulation (the compliance report) and when a startup,
shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) report is required in case the facility
does not follow its approved SSM Plan (assumed twice a year) for a total
of four semiannual reports per year.

	During a previous renewal, information provided by the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) was used to project industry
growth.  Based on an assessment of information from the EPA Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) reporting system, OAQPS did not
project any growth for the affected industry.

The active (previous) ICR had the following Terms of Clearance (TOC):
“Under the terms of the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, EPA
should review this collection before resubmitting it for approval and
ensure that, to the extent practicable, the collection has been revised
to include electronic means of reporting.”

	EPA has addressed each item of concern in the TOC by reviewing and
revising the collection, to the extent practicable, to include
electronic means of reporting.  See Section 4(b)(i).

During the current renewal of this ICR, EPA consulted with industry on
the accuracy of the burden estimates.  Details of the consultation may
be found in Section 3(c).

The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found in Table 1: Annual
Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63,
Subpart GGGGG).  The “Affected Public” burden includes respondent
burden for the private sector and state, local and tribal governments.
The burden to the “Federal Government” is attributed entirely to
work performed by federal employees or government contractors; this
burden includes report review and respondent burden for the federal
government and may be found in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden,
NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

The ICR associated with this original rule specifies that the primary
affected public category is the private sector; the ICR also anticipates
respondents from within the Federal government and state, local, or
tribal governments.  The most recent previous ICR renewal (2062.03)
estimates 10 percent of respondents are from the Federal government, and
5 percent of respondents are from state, local, or tribal governments.
This ICR uses the same methodology to estimate 243 respondents from the
private sector, 14 from the state, local or tribal governments, and 29
from the Federal government.

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as
amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or
subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air
pollutants.  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources
of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of
emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the
Administrator may require any owner/operator subject to any requirement
of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C)
install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit
procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with
such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during
such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe);
(E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables
or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is
impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with
Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the
Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, site remediation activities involve the
clean up of materials that could potentially emit volatile organic
hazardous air pollutants (VOHAP).  VOHAP emissions cause or contribute
to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP standards were promulgated for
this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart GGGGG.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standards ensure
compliance with the applicable regulations which where promulgated in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also
used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected
facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standards.
Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the
standards at all times.  During the performance test, a record of the
operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded
and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission
monitor.

The notifications required in the standards are used to inform the
Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the
requirements of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then
inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated and that the standards are being met.
The performance test may also be observed.

The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess
emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify
operation/maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.

To minimize the burden, much of the information the EPA needs to
determine compliance is recorded and retained on-site at the facility.
Such information will be reviewed by the enforcement personnel during an
inspection and will not need to be reported routinely to the EPA.  The
Agency requires respondents to report a minimal amount of information to
demonstrate compliance.  However, when a deviation occurs, additional
information must be reported that describes the cause of the deviation,
steps taken to correct the problem, and time required to return to
compliance.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part
63, subpart GGGGG.

3(a)  Nonduplication

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is
sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If
a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR
was published in the Federal Register (74 FR 38004) on July 30, 2009.
No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal
Register.

3(c)  Consultations

It is our policy to review any comments received since the last ICR
renewal including those submitted in response to the first Federal
Register notice and respond appropriately.  It should be noted that
participants outside the EPA that were involved in the development of
the site remediation NESHAP include other Federal agencies, state air
regulatory agencies, trade associations, and private businesses.

The primary source of information was the industry and EPA data
including an assessment by the Office of Air and Radiation.  Information
provided by the industry is retained in the EPA Air Facility System
(AFS) database which is operated and maintained by the EPA Office of
Compliance.  AFS is the EPA database for the collection, maintenance,
and retrieval of all compliance data.  Approximately 286 respondents are
currently subject to the regulation.  The Agency estimates that there
will not be any industry growth in the next three years.

It should be noted that the industry trade associations and other
interested parties were provided an opportunity to comment on the burden
associated with the standard when it was proposed, and the standard was
previously reviewed to determine the minimum information needed for
compliance purposes.  No major problems regarding the rule monitoring,
recordkeeping, or reporting were identified during the public comment
period.

	For this renewal, EPA contacted representatives of industry trade
organizations to request a voluntary opinion as to the accuracy of the
burden estimates associated with this ICR and whether there is any way
to reduce the burden.  The American Chemistry Council, Lorraine
Gershman, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, did not identify any issues
associated with this ICR and had no comments on the estimates.

	EPA also contacted the American Petroleum Institute (API), Khary
Cauthen, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; no comments were received.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful
techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required
by these standards was collected less frequently, the proper operation
and maintenance of control equipment and the possibility of detecting
violations would be less likely.

3(e)  General Guidelines

These reporting or recordkeeping requirements do not violate any of the
regulations promulgated by OMB under 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

These standards require the respondents to maintain all records,
including reports and notifications for at least five years.  This is
consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards.  EPA
believes that the five-year records retention requirement is consistent
with the Part 70 permit program and the five-year statute of limitations
on which the permit program is based.  The retention of records for five
years allows EPA to establish the compliance history of a source, any
pattern of non-compliance and to determine the appropriate level of
enforcement action.  EPA has found that the most flagrant violators have
violations extending beyond five years.  In addition, EPA would be
prevented from pursuing the violators due to the destruction or
nonexistence of essential records.

3(f)  Confidentiality

Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B -
Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902,
September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR
42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g)  Sensitive Questions

The reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard do not
include sensitive questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

Unlike a specific industry sector or type of business, the respondents
potentially affected by this ICR cannot be easily or definitively
identified.  Potentially, the site remediation NESHAP may be applicable
to any type of business or facility at which a site remediation is
conducted to clean up media contaminated with organic HAP, and the
remediation activities performed and the magnitude of the cleanup meets
the applicability criteria specified in the rule.  A site remediation
that is subject to this rule potentially may be conducted at any type of
privately owned or government-owned facility at which contamination has
occurred due to past events or current activities at the facility.  Site
remediations performed at sites where the facility has permanently
closed, the owner has gone out of business, or the facility has been
abandoned and there is no owner (in this latter case, a government
agency takes responsibility for the cleanup) are not subject to this
NESHAP in most cases.

The regulated sources under this NESHAP (i.e., the site remediation
activities) are not the predominant activity, process, operation, or
service conducted at the facility.  A comprehensive list of North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes cannot be compiled
for the respondents who will potentially be regulated by this action due
to the nature of activities regulated by the source category.  The NAICS
code indicates a primary product produced or service provided at the
facility rather than the presence of a site remediation performed to
support the predominant function of the facility.  Some representative
NAICS codes for facilities where site remediations have been, or are
currently being, conducted at some (but not all) facilities under a
given code include: 325211, 325192, 325188, 32411, 49311, 49319, 48611,
42269, and 42271.  However, these codes are not necessarily
comprehensive as to the types of facilities at which site remediations
subject to the rule may be required in the future.

4(b)  Information Requested

Each respondent to this information collection is required to submit to
the EPA a one-time notification of applicability of the respondent's
facility to the final NESHAP.  The respondents will be required to
perform an annual performance test for each control device used to
comply with the emission limitation standards and submit to the
EPA/permitting authority a report following the test.  Between
performance tests, the respondents will be required to monitor selected
operating parameters indicative of the control device performance and to
maintain records of the monitoring results.  Semiannually, the
respondent will be required to prepare and submit to the EPA a
compliance report describing any periods of control device operation
during which the monitored values of the control device operating
parameters deviated from the boundaries established during the most
recent performance test.

For the affected sources subject to work practice standards, the
respondents will be required to collect and maintain records of the air
pollution equipment inspections and repairs, as specified in the rule.
In addition, the respondents will need to maintain records of initial
and subsequent determinations for any affected sources qualifying for an
exemption from control requirements under the rule.

Records and reports must be retained for a total of five years.  Records
must be kept on-site for two of the five years, and for three of the
years, records may be placed at an off-site location.  The files can be
maintained on microfilm, on computer or floppy disks, on magnetic tape
disks, or on microfiche.

(i)  Data Items

In this ICR, all the data that is recorded or reported is required by
the NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR part 63, subpart GGGGG).

A source must make the following reports:

Reports for 40 CFR part 63, subpart GGGGG

Requirement	40 CFR part 63 subpart GGGGG Citation	40 CFR part 63 subpart
A Citation

Notifications and Reports

Initial notification	63.7950(a), (c)	63.9(b)

Notification of performance tests	63.7950(a), (d)	63.7, 63.9(e)

Notification of compliance status	63.7950(a), (e)	63.9(h)

Performance test results	63.7950(a), (e)	63.10(d)(2)

Notification of alternative standard selection (if applicable)
63.7950(f)

	Semiannual compliance reports	63.7951(a), (b)	63.10(e)

Startup, shutdown, malfunction reports	63.7951(a), (b), (c)	63.10(d)(5)

Part 70 monitoring report	63.7951(d)

A source must maintain the following records:

Recordkeeping for 40 CFR part 63, subpart GGGGG

Requirement	40 CFR part 63 subpart GGGGG Citation	40 CFR part 63 subpart
A Citation	Retention Time

Copies of each notification and report submitted to comply with subpart
as listed above 	63.7952(a)(1)

5 years

Records related to startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions	63.7952(a)(2)
63.10(b)(2)	5 years

Records of performance tests	63.7952(a)(3)	63.10(b)(2)	5 years

Records of initial and subsequent determinations for affected sources
exempted from control requirements	63.7952(a)(4)	63.10(b)(2)	5 years

Records of control device operating parameter continuous monitoring
system (CMS) deviations, calibrations, and maintenance	63.7952(b)
63.10(b)(2)	5 years

Records to show continuous compliance with each emissions limitation,
work practice standard, and operation and maintenance requirement
63.7952(c), (d)	63.10(b)(2)	5 years

Respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records
parameter data.  Although personnel at the affected facility must still
evaluate the data, internal automation has significantly reduced the
burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at a plant site.
Respondents will submit hard copy reports.  To minimize the burden, much
of the information the EPA needs to determine compliance will be
recorded and retained on-site at the facility.

(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Install, calibrate, maintain, operate continuous monitoring system for
VOHAP

Perform initial performance test

Write the notification and reports listed above

Enter information required to be recorded above

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and using
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and
verifying information

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining information

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of disclosing and providing information

Train personnel to respond to a collection information

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information

Electronic Reporting

Some of the respondents are using monitoring equipment that
automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the
affected facility must still evaluate the data, internal automation has
significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and
recordkeeping at a remediation site.

Also, regulatory agencies, in cooperation with the respondents, continue
to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However,
electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time,
it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use
electronic reporting

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

5(a)  Agency Activities

EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Review initial notification

Review performance test notification

Conduct initial compliance determination

Review performance test reports

Review semiannual summary reports and any SSM reports

Audit facility records

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air facility Subsystem (AFS)
data base

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority could inspect
the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by
the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with the
emission standard.  Data and records maintained by the respondents are
tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs.
The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check
on source operation and maintenance and for compliance determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is
operated and maintained by the EPA Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA’s
database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance
data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned
facilities.  EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and
enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices
and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit,
store, retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the
owner/operator for five years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

The rule places no requirement on any facility to initiate site
remediation activities.  The EPA anticipates that parties that undertake
site remediation generally do so voluntarily and that the impact of this
rule on those parties will not be significant.  Further, because states
and other parties decide whether to undertake site remediation
activities, predicting how many, or what types of small entities will
undertake such activities, is extremely difficult, if not impossible.
Nonetheless, the rule is structured to avoid impacts on small
businesses.

The rule specifically excludes from its scope remediations conducted at
gasoline stations, farm sites, and residential sites.  Moreover, the
rule applies only to remediation sites located at a facility that is a
major source under the CAA and at which is collocated one or more
non-remediation activities listed as a Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) major source category, pursuant to CAA section 112(c).
 Such sources tend to be large businesses.  The rule also contains
applicability emission thresholds that are likely to exclude many site
remediations conducted at small businesses.  For example, the rule
exempts sources where the total annual quantity of HAP contained in all
extracted remediation material at the facility is less than 1 megagram
per year.  For these reasons, the rule does not impose a significant
burden on a substantial number of small entities.

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in below Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and
Cost, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Tables 1 and 2 document the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the affected
sources for the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens
are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with
the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Where
appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.
Responses to this information collection are mandatory.

The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB Control Number.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry (private sector and state, local
or tribal governments) over the next three years from these
recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 112,349
hours (Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  The overall recordkeeping hours
shown in Table 1 are 85,621.  The overall reporting requirement hours
shown in Table 1 are 26,728.  These hours are based on Agency studies
and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency
knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously
approved ICR, and any comments received.

Estimating the number of respondents for the site remediation NESHAP is
more difficult than the other source categories for which the EPA
establishes NESHAP because of a unique set of considerations.  As
discussed earlier in Section 4(a), site remediations cannot be
categorized by a particular industry sector or group of industry
sectors.  Another consideration is the finite period for which a site
remediation is conducted.  The objective of a site remediation is to
mitigate a detected risk to public health or the environment by
successfully completing the cleanup of the area contaminated by a
hazardous substance.  For NESHAP source categories associated with
industrial processes or product distribution, a facility and its air
emission sources typically remain in operation for many years.  When an
existing source reaches the end of its useful service life, it is often
reconstructed or replaced with a new source.  In contrast, the air
emission sources associated with site remediations cease to exist once
the remediation cleanup criteria are achieved.  Depending on
site-specific facts such as the extent of the contamination and the type
of remediation activities needed, the “life span” of a given site
remediation may be a short period lasting several weeks to a more
extended period lasting several years.  Even for those site remediations
requiring a number of years to complete, it is important to recognize
that ultimately, the remediation activities at a facility will be
completed and the air emission sources will no longer exist.  Thus, at
any given time, the number of respondents will be changing since at some
facilities the site remediations are completed (i.e., subtracting
respondents from the total number), at other facilities the site
remediations are still on-going, and at some new facilities site
remediations are beginning (i.e., adding respondents to the total
number).

The annual burden estimates for reporting and recordkeeping presented in
Table 1 are based on an estimated total of 286 respondents, 243 of which
are from the private sector, 14 from state, local or tribal governments,
and 29 from the Federal government.  The respondent numbers used for the
estimates were derived from data used by EPA for estimating the
nationwide emission reduction and cost impacts of the final rule.  For
this total number of respondents, 26 respondents (9 percent) are
estimated to use an in-situ treatment process.  At each of these sites,
a control device is assumed to be required on the process vent.  The
other 260 respondents (91 percent) are assumed to use an on-site ex-situ
treatment process.  The vast majority of these sites use tanks for
storage and handling of contaminated media.  Although a rare practice at
existing sites, and not likely to be used at future sites, use of
surface impoundments at the ex-situ treatment sites is included in the
burden estimates by assuming that 5 of the 260 sites use a surface
impoundment in place of tanks.  Finally, the organic content of the
contaminated media extracted at most of the ex-situ treatment sites will
be below the 10 percent threshold level specified in the final rule for
implementation of a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program.  For the
burden estimates, it is assumed that 10 facilities will need to
implement an LDAR program.  Other assumptions are that 9 percent of the
respondents operating ex-situ treatment sites (26 respondents) choose to
exempt one source at the site from the air emission control requirements
according to the rule requirements, and an additional unit, an oil/water
separator, is used at five of the sites.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial	$114.77 ($54.65 + 110%)

Technical	$97.59 ($46.47 + 110%)

Clerical	$48.26 ($22.98 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, March 2009, Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational
and industry group.  The rates are from column 1, Total compensation.
The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit
packages available to those employed by private industry.

(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection
activities in the subject standards are both labor costs which are
addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous
monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and
maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitors and
other costs such as photocopying and postage.

(iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

A

Monitoring Equipment	B

Startup Cost for One Affected Facility	C

Number of New Affected facilities to Startup	D

Total Startup Costs

(BxC)	E

Annual O&M Costs for One Affected Facility	F

Number of Affected Facilities with O&M	G

Total O&M

(ExF)

Parametric system	$10,000	0	0	$2,000	286	$572,000

Leak detection	$1,500	0	0	$1,000	10	$10,000

Total

$582,000

There are no capital/startup costs for this ICR.  The total operation
and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $582,000.  This is the
total of column G, which is the total costs for all 286
respondents—including 243 respondents from the private sector
($494,496 – rounded down), 14 respondents from the state, local or
tribal governments (28,490), and 29 respondents from the Federal
government (59,014).

The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and
maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $582,000.  These are recordkeeping costs.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the
reported information.  Additionally, the Federal government incurs
burden (both labor costs and O&M) as respondents.  The EPA compliance
and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of
records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of
emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected
information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $1,555,772.

This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

	Managerial	$61.36 (GS-13, Step 5, $38.35 + 60%)

	Technical	$45.52 (GS-12, Step 1, $28.45 + 60%)

	Clerical	$24.64 (GS-6, Step 3, $15.40 + 60%)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2009
General Schedule, which excludes locality rates of pay.  The rates have
been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit packages
available to government employees.  Details upon which this estimate is
based appear below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden, NESHAP for
Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three
years, approximately 286 existing respondents will be subject to the
standard.  It is estimated that no new respondents will become subject
to the standard.

Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Cost

Regulation Citation	A

Average Number of New Respondents Per Year	B

Number of Reports for New Sources	C

Number of Existing Respondents	D

Number of Reports for Existing Sources	E

Number of Respondents That Keep Records but Do Not Submit Reports	F

Total Annual Responses

(AxB)+(CxD)+E

Semiannual reports	0	0	286	2	0	572

SSM reports when not in compliance with the SSM Plan	0	0	0	0	0	0

The number of Total Annual Responses is 572.

The total annual labor costs to non-Federal-government respondents are
$10,796,331.  Details regarding these estimates may be found below in
Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Site Remediation
(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is
estimated to be 18,398 labor hours at a cost of $1,496,758 (not
including startup and O&M costs).  See Table 2 below: Average Annual EPA
Burden, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entities
are $582,000.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii),
Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

The total annual respondent labor costs for all types of respondents is
$12,014,594.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the
respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2 below,
respectively, and summarized below.

(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual respondent labor hours are 112,349 for the private
sector, state, local and tribal government respondents, and 12,678 for
Federal government respondents.  Details regarding these estimates may
be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Site
Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG) and Table 2: Average Annual
EPA Burden, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).
 Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is estimated to average 219 hours per
response.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity
are $582,000.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii),
Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is
estimated to be 18,398 labor hours at a cost of $1,496,758.  Including
O&M costs, the total cost is $1,555,772.  See Table 2: Average Annual
EPA Burden, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG)
(below).

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the labor hours in this ICR compared to the
previous ICR.  This is due to two considerations.  First, the
regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not
anticipated to change over the next three years.  Secondly, the growth
rate for respondents is very low, negative, or non-existent.  Therefore,
the labor hours in the previous ICR reflect the current burden to the
respondents and are reiterated in this ICR.  There is a minor change to
the cost figures due to updates in labor rates and some minor
mathematical errors have been corrected.  The updated labor categories
and associated rates result in an increase to total labor cost.

	There is also a change in the method of reporting in this ICR.  The
labor hours and costs are calculated separately for each respondent
type: “private sector,” “state, local or tribal governments,”
and “Federal government”.  There is no change in the total
respondent burden hours (comprising both industry and Federal government
respondents).

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average 219 hours per response.  Burden
means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or
for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA regulations are listed
at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0545.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in
the docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are
also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance
Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA
Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number
for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0545 and OMB Control Number 2060-0534 in any
correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in
collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Site
Remediation (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG)

Information Collection Activity	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H

	Labor hours per Activity	Activities per Respondent per Year	Total
Number of Respondents	Manage-ment hours per year	Technical hours per
year	Clerical hours per year	Total Person Hours per Year	Total Cost per
Year

	Mngmt	Technical	Clerical	 	 	 	 	 	 	($)

Private Sector

1. Applications	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

2. Surveys and Studies	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

3. Parametric 	4	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Monitoring System

4. Reporting requirements

- Read instructions	8	16	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Conduct performance test	16	120	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial notification	8	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test notification	2	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial compliance determination	8	40	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test report	8	80	16	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Semiannual report	4	40	8	2	243	1944.00	19440	3888.00	25,272	$2,307,897

- SSM report	1	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Reporting	 	 	 	 	 	25,272	25,272	$2,307,897

5. Recordkeeping requirements

- Read instructions	8	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Plan activities	8	100	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare SSM plan	16	80	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare documentation for exempted sources	16	80	8	1	22.1	353.5	1767.3
176.7	2,297	$221,563

- In-situ process vents parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	22.1	0	4031.6
0	4,032	$393,443

- Ex-situ process vents parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	220.9	0
40315.9	0	40,316	$3,934,430

- Inspect tank covers	0	2	0	12	216.7	0	5199.9	0	5,200	$507,454

- Inspect container covers	0	0.5	0	12	220.9	0	1325.5	0	1,325	$129,351

- Inspect surface impoundment covers	0	2	0	12	4.2	0	102.0	0	102	$9,950

- Inspect separator covers	0	2	0	12	4.2	0	102.0	0	102	$9,950

- Inspect transfer system covers	0	0.5	0	12	220.9	0	1325.5	0	1,325
$129,351

- Leak detection and repair program	16	100	0	1	8.5	135.9	849.7	0	986
$98,520

- Develop record system	16	100	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Enter information	0	2	0	52	243	0	25272	0	25,272	$2,466,294

- Personnel training	2	20	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Recordkeeping	 	 	 	 	 	80,957	80,957	$7,900,306

Total for Private Sector	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	106,229	$10,208,204

State, Local or Tribal Government

1. Applications	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

2. Surveys and Studies	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

3. Parametric 	4	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Monitoring System

4. Reporting requirements

- Read instructions	8	16	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Conduct performance test	16	120	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial notification	8	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test notification	2	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial compliance determination	8	40	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test report	8	80	16	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Semiannual report	4	40	8	2	14	112	1120	224	1,456	$132,965

- SSM report	1	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Reporting	 	 	 	 	 	1,456	1,456	$132,965

5. Recordkeeping requirements

- Read instructions	8	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Plan activities	8	100	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare SSM plan	16	80	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare documentation for exempted sources	16	80	8	1	1.3	20.4	101.8
10.2	132	$12,765

- In-situ process vents parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	1.3	0	232.3	0
232	$22,667

- Ex-situ process vents parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	12.7	0	2322.7
0	2,323	$226,675

- Inspect tank covers	0	2	0	12	12.5	0	299.6	0	300	$29,236

- Inspect container covers	0	0.5	0	12	12.7	0	76.4	0	76	$7,452

- Inspect surface impoundment covers	0	2	0	12	0.2	0	5.9	0	6	$573

- Inspect separator covers	0	2	0	12	0.2	0	5.9	0.0	6	$573

- Inspect transfer system covers	0	0.5	0	12	12.7	0	76.4	0	76	$7,452

- Leak detection and repair program	16	100	0	1	0.5	7.8	49.0	0	57	$5,676

- Develop record system	16	100	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Enter information	0	2	0	52	14	0	1456	0	1,456	$142,091

- Personnel training	2	20	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Recordkeeping	 	 	 	 	 	4,664	4,664	$455,162

Total for State, Local or Tribal Government
6,120	$588,127

Overall Reporting	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	26,728	$2,440,863

Overall Recordkeeping	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	85,621	$8,355,468

OVERALL TOTAL	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	112,349	$10,796,331

Assumptions

Cost: managerial -$114.77/hr, technical - $97.59/hr, clerical -
$48.26/hr.

2) 243 respondents from the private sectors, 29 respondents from the
Federal government, and 14 respondents from state, local or tribal
governments.  (286 respondents total).

3) 26 out of 286 respondents (9 percent) are estimated to use an in-situ
treatment process.  At each of these sites, it is assumed that a control
device is required on the process vent.

4) 260 out of 286 respondents (90 percent) are assumed to use an on-site
ex-situ treatment process.

5) 5 of the 260 sites use a surface impoundment in place of tanks.

6) 10 facilities implement an LDAR program.

7) 26 out of 286 respondents exempt one source at the site from the air
emission control requirements.

8) Oil/water separator is used at five of the sites.

9) Previous ICR allowed two SSM reports per year, but we determined that
these reports are typically included in the semiannual reports.

10) The relative proportions in assumptions (3) through (7) are applied
to each respondent type according to the breakdown explained in
Assumption (2).

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden, NESHAP for Site Remediation (40
CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGGG).

Information Collection Activity	A	B	C	E	F	G	H	I

	Labor Hours per Activity per Labor Category	Activities per Respondent
per Year	Total Number of Respondents	Management hours per year	Technical
hours per year	Clerical hours per year	Total Person Hours per Year	Total
Labor Costs per Year

	Managerial	Technical	Clerical	 	 	 	 	 	 	($)

Report Review

a. Initial notification	1	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

b. Performance test notification	1	2	0	0	286	0	0	0	0	$0

c. Initial compliance determination	4	24	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

d. Performance test reports	4	24	0	0	286	0	0	0	0	$0

e. Semiannual report	2	8	0	2	286	1144	4576	0	5,720	$278,495

TOTAL for Report Review	 	 	 	 	 	 	5,720	$278,495

Respondent Burden - Federal Government

1. Applications	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

2. Surveys and Studies	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA

3. Parametric 	4	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Monitoring System

4. Reporting requirements

- Read instructions	8	16	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Conduct performance test	16	120	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial notification	8	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test notification	2	0	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Initial compliance

  determination	8	40	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Performance test

  report	8	80	16	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Semiannual report	4	40	8	2	29	232.00	2320	464.00	3,016	$275,428

- SSM report	1	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Reporting	 	 	 	 	 	3,016	3,016	$275,428

5. Recordkeeping requirements

- Read instructions	8	40	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Plan activities	8	100	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare SSM plan	16	80	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Prepare

  documentation for exempted sources	16	80	8	1	2.6	42.2	210.9	21.1	274
$26,442

- In-situ process vents

parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	2.6	0	481.1	0	481	$46,954

- Ex-situ process vents

parametric monitoring	0	0.5	0	365	26.4	0	4811.4	0	4,811	$469,541

- Inspect tank covers	0	2	0	12	25.9	0	620.6	0	621	$60,560

- Inspect container

covers	0	0.5	0	12	26.4	0	158.2	0	158	$15,437

- Inspect surface

impoundment covers	0	2	0	12	0.5	0	12.2	0	12	$1,187

- Inspect separator

covers	0	2	0	12	0.5	0	12.2	0	12	$1,187

- Inspect transfer system

 covers	0	0.5	0	12	26.4	0	158.2	0	158	$15,437

- Leak detection and

 repair program	16	100	0	1	1.0	16.2	101.4	0	118	$11,757

- Develop record

 system	16	100	8	1	0	0	0	0	0	$0

- Enter information	0	2	0	52	29	0	3016	0	3,016	$294,331

- Personnel training	2	20	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	$0

Subtotal Recordkeeping	 	 	 	 	 	9,662	9,662	$942,835

Subtotal for Federal Government Respondent
12,678	$1,218,263

Total Labor Burden	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	18,398	$1,496,758

Startup and O&M

$59,014

Total Labor hours and Cost

	18,398	$1,555,772

Assumptions for Report Review

1) Managerial labor - $61.36, technical labor-$45.52, clerical
labor-$24.64.

Assumptions for Federal Government Respondent

Cost: managerial -$114.77/hr, technical - $97.59/hr, clerical -
$48.26/hr.

2) 243 respondents from the private sectors, 29 respondents from the
Federal government, and 14 respondents from state, local or tribal
governments.  (286 respondents total).

3) 26 out of 286 respondents (9 percent) are estimated to use an in-situ
treatment process.  At each of these sites, it is assumed that a control
device is required on the process vent.  4) 260 out of 286 respondents
(91 percent) are assumed to use an on-site ex-situ treatment process.

5) 5 of the 260 sites use a surface impoundment in place of tanks.

6) 10 facilities implement an LDAR program.

7) 26 out of 286 respondents exempt one source at the site from the air
emission control requirements.

8) Oil/water separator is used at five of the sites.

9) Previous ICR allowed two SSM reports per year, but we determined that
these reports are typically included in the semiannual reports.

10) The relative proportions in assumptions (3) through (7) are applied
to each respondent type according to the breakdown explained in
Assumption (2).

 PAGE

 PAGE  20


Performance Specification 3--Specifications and Test Procedures for
O2 and CO2 Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems
in Stationary Sources

* * * * *

13.0 Method Performance

* * * * *
    13.2 CEMS Relative Accuracy Performance Specification. The RA of
the CEMS must be no greater than 20.0 percent of the mean value of
the reference method (RM) data when calculated using equation 3-1.
The results are also acceptable if the result of Equation 3-2 is
less than or equal to 1.0 percent O2 (or CO2).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.016

Where:

d = Absolute value of the mean of the differences (from Equation 2-3
of Performance Specification 2).
[verbarlm]CC[verbarlm] = Absolute value of the confidence
coefficient (from Equation 2-5 of Performance Specification 2).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.017

* * * * *

Performance Specification 4A--Specifications and Test Procedures for
Carbon Monoxide Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary
Sources

* * * * *

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

* * * * *
    8.3 Response Time Test Procedure. The response time test applies
to all types of CEMS, but will generally have significance only for
extractive systems. The entire system is checked with this procedure
including applicable sample extraction and transport, sample
conditioning, gas analyses, and data recording.
    8.3.1 Introduce zero gas into the system. When the system output
has stabilized (no change greater than 1 percent of full scale for
30 sec), introduce an upscale calibration gas and wait for a stable
value. Record the time (upscale response time) required to reach 95
percent of the final stable value. Next, reintroduce the zero gas
and wait for a stable reading before recording the response time
(downscale response time). Repeat the entire procedure three times
and determine the mean upscale and downscale response times. The
slower or longer of the two means is the system response time.
* * * * *

13.0 Method Performance

* * * * *
    13.3 Response Time. The CEMS response time shall not exceed 2.0
min to achieve 95 percent of the final stable value.
* * * * *

Performance Specification 11--Specifications and Test Procedures for
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary
Sources

* * * * *

12.0 What calculations and data analyses are needed?

* * * * *

    12.1 How do I calculate upscale drift and zero drift? You must
determine the difference in your PM CEMS output readings from the
established reference values (zero and upscale check values) after a
stated period of operation during which you performed no unscheduled
maintenance, repair, or adjustment.
    (1) Calculate the upscale drift (UD) using Equation 11-1:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.018

Where:

UD = The upscale (high-level) drift of your PM CEMS in percent,
RCEM = The measured PM CEMS response to the upscale
reference standard, and
RU = The pre-established numerical value of the upscale
reference standard.
Rr = The response range of the analyzer.

    (2) Calculate the zero drift (ZD) using Equation 11-2:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.019

Where:

ZD = The zero (low-level) drift of your PM CEMS in percent,
RCEM = The measured PM CEMS response to the zero
reference standard,
RL = The pre-established numerical value of the zero
reference standard, and
Rr = The response range of the analyzer.
* * * * *
    13.0 What are the performance criteria for my PM CEMS?
* * * * *
    13.1 What is the 7-day drift check performance specification?
Your daily PM CEMS internal drift checks must demonstrate that the
average daily drift of your PM CEMS does not deviate from the value
of the reference light, optical filter, Beta attenuation signal, or
other technology-suitable reference standard by more than 2 percent
of the response range. If your CEMS includes diluent and/or
auxiliary monitors (for temperature, pressure, and/or moisture) that
are employed as a necessary part of this performance specification,
you must determine the calibration drift separately for each
ancillary monitor in terms of its respective output (see the
appropriate performance specification for the diluent CEMS
specification). None of the calibration drifts may exceed their
individual specification.
* * * * *

Performance Specification 15--Performance Specification for Extractive
FTIR Continuous Emissions Monitor Systems in Stationary Sources

* * * * *

9.0 Quality Control

* * * * *
    9.1.2 Test Procedure. Spike the audit sample using the analyte
spike procedure in section 11. The audit sample is measured directly
by the FTIR system (undiluted) and then spiked into the effluent at
a known dilution ratio. Measure a series of spiked and unspiked
samples using the same procedures as those used to analyze the stack
gas. Analyze the results using sections 12.1 and 12.2. The measured
concentration of each analyte must be within 5 percent
of the expected concentration (plus the uncertainty), i.e., the
calculated correction factor must be within 0.93 and 1.07 for an
audit with an analyte uncertainty of 2 percent.
* * * * *
    14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]
    15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]
* * * * *

Performance Specification 16--Specifications and Test Procedures for
Predictive Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources

* * * * *

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

* * * * *
    12.2.3 Confidence Coefficient. Calculate the confidence
coefficient using Equation 16-3 and Table 16-1 for n-1 degrees of
freedom.
* * * * *

17.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

  Table 16-1--t-Values for One-sided, 97.5 Percent Confidence Intervals
                       for Selected Sample Sizes *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            n-1                                 t0.025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..........................................................       12.706
2..........................................................        4.303
3..........................................................        3.182
4..........................................................        2.776
5..........................................................        2.571
6..........................................................        2.447
7..........................................................        2.365
8..........................................................        2.306
9..........................................................        2.262
10.........................................................        2.228
11.........................................................        2.201
12.........................................................        2.179
13.........................................................        2.160
14.........................................................        2.145
15.........................................................        2.131
16.........................................................        2.120
17.........................................................        2.110
18.........................................................        2.101
19.........................................................        2.093
20.........................................................        2.086
21.........................................................        2.080
22.........................................................        2.074
23.........................................................        2.069
24.........................................................        2.064
25.........................................................        2.060
26.........................................................        2.056
27.........................................................        2.052
>28........................................................      t-Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* n-1 equals the degrees of freedom.

* * * * *
0
19. Revise section 12.0 paragraphs (3) and (4) in Procedure 2 of
appendix F to part 60 to read as follows:

Appendix F to Part 60--Quality Assurance Procedures

* * * * *

Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources

* * * * *

12.0 What calculations and data analysis must I perform for my PM
CEMS?

* * * * *
    (3) How do I calculate daily upscale and zero drift? You must
calculate the upscale drift using Equation 2-2 and the zero drift
using Equation 2-3:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.020

Where:
UD = The upscale drift of your PM CEMS, in percent,
RCEM = Your PM CEMS response to the upscale check value,
and
RU = The upscale check value.
Rr = The response range of the analyzer.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.021

Where:
ZD = The zero (low-level) drift of your PM CEMS, in percent,
RCEM = Your PM CEMS response of the zero check value,
RL = The zero check value.
Rr = The response range of the analyzer.

    (4) How do I calculate SVA accuracy? You must use Equation 2-4
to calculate the accuracy, in percent, for each of the three SVA
tests or the daily sample volume check:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08SE15.022

Where:
VM = Sample gas volume determined/reported by your PM
CEMS (e.g., dscm),
VR = Sample gas volume measured by the independent
calibrated reference device (e.g., dscm) for the SVA or the
reference value for the daily sample volume check.

    Note:  Before calculating SVA accuracy, you must correct the
sample gas volumes measured by your PM CEMS and the independent
calibrated reference device to the same basis of temperature,
pressure, and moisture content. You must document all data and
calculations.

* * * * *

PART 61-NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

0
20. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
21. In Sec.  61.13, revise paragraph (e)(1)(i) to read as follows:

Sec.  61.13  Emission tests and waiver of emission tests.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The source owner, operator, or representative of the tested
facility shall obtain an audit sample, if commercially available, from
an AASP for each test method used for regulatory compliance purposes.
No audit samples are required for the following test methods: Methods
3A and 3C of appendix A-3 of part 60 of this chapter; Methods 6C, 7E,
9, and 10 of appendix A-4 of part 60; Method 18 and 19 of appendix A-6
of part 60; Methods 20, 22, and 25A of appendix A-7 of part 60; Methods
30A and 30B of appendix A-8 of part 60; and Methods 303, 318, 320, and
321 of appendix A of part 63 of this chapter. If multiple sources at a
single facility are tested during a compliance test event, only one
audit sample is required for each method used during a compliance test.
The compliance authority responsible for the compliance test may waive
the requirement to include an audit sample if they believe that an
audit sample is not necessary. ``Commercially available'' means that
two or more independent AASPs have blind audit samples available for
purchase. If the source owner, operator, or representative cannot find
an audit sample for a specific method, the owner, operator, or
representative shall consult the EPA Web site at the following URL,
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm whether there is a source that can
supply an audit sample for that method. If the EPA Web site does not
list an available audit sample at least 60 days prior to the beginning
of the compliance test, the source owner, operator, or representative
shall not be required to include an audit sample as part of the quality
assurance program for the compliance test. When ordering an audit
sample, the source owner, operator, or representative shall give the
sample provider an estimate for the concentration of each pollutant
that is emitted by the source or the estimated concentration of each
pollutant based on the permitted level and the name, address, and phone
number of the compliance authority. The source owner, operator, or
representative shall report the results for the audit sample along with
a summary of the emission test results for the audited pollutant to the
compliance authority and shall report the results of the audit sample
to the AASP. The source owner, operator, or representative shall make
both reports at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to
the compliance authority first and then report to the AASP. If the
method being audited is a method that allows the samples to be analyzed
in the field and the tester plans to analyze the samples in the field,
the tester may analyze the audit samples prior to collecting the
emission samples provided a representative of the compliance authority
is present at the testing site. The tester may request, and the
compliance authority may grant, a waiver to the requirement that a
representative of the compliance authority must be present at the
testing site during the field analysis of an audit sample. The source
owner, operator, or representative may report the results of the audit
sample to the compliance authority and then report the results of the
audit sample to the AASP prior to collecting any emission samples. The
test protocol and final test report shall document whether an audit
sample was ordered and utilized and the pass/fail results as
applicable.
* * * * *
0
22. Revise the section heading for section 11.7.3 in Method 107 of
appendix B to part 61 to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 61--Test Methods

* * * * *

Method 107--Determination of Vinyl Chloride Content of In-Process
Wastewater Samples, and Vinyl Chloride Content of Polyvinyl Chloride
Resin Slurry, Wet Cake, and Latex Samples

* * * * *

11.0 Analytical Procedure

* * * * *
    11.7.3 Dispersion Resin Slurry and Latex Samples. * * *
* * * * *

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
23. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

0
24. In Sec.  63.7:
0
a. Revise paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A).
0
b. Add paragraph (g)(2).
    The revision and addition read as follows:

Sec.  63.7  Performance testing requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) The source owner, operator, or representative of the tested
facility shall obtain an audit sample, if commercially available, from
an AASP for each test method used for regulatory compliance purposes.
No audit samples are required for the following test methods: Methods
3A and 3C of appendix A-3 of part 60 of this chapter; Methods 6C, 7E,
9, and 10 of appendix A-4 of part 60; Methods 18 and 19 of appendix A-6
of part 60; Methods 20, 22, and 25A of appendix A-7 of part 60; Methods
30A and 30B of appendix A-8 of part 60; and Methods 303, 318, 320, and
321 of appendix A of this part. If multiple sources at a single
facility are tested during a compliance test event, only one audit
sample is required for each method used during a compliance test. The
compliance authority responsible for the compliance test may waive the
requirement to include an audit sample if they believe that an audit
sample is not necessary. ``Commercially available'' means that two or
more independent AASPs have blind audit samples available for purchase.
If the source owner, operator, or representative cannot find an audit
sample for a specific method, the owner, operator, or representative
shall consult the EPA Web site at the following URL, www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm whether there is a source that can supply an audit
sample for that method. If the EPA Web site does not list an available
audit sample at least 60 days prior to the beginning of the compliance
test, the source owner, operator, or representative shall not be
required to include an audit sample as part of the quality assurance
program for the compliance test. When ordering an audit sample, the
source owner, operator, or representative shall give the sample
provider an estimate for the concentration of each pollutant that is
emitted by the source or the estimated concentration of each pollutant
based on the permitted level and the name, address, and phone number of
the compliance authority. The source owner, operator, or representative
shall report the results for the audit sample along with a summary of
the emission test results for the audited pollutant to the compliance
authority and shall report the results of the audit sample to the AASP.
The source owner, operator, or representative shall make both reports
at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to the
compliance authority first and then report to the AASP. If the method
being audited is a method that allows the samples to be analyzed in the
field and the tester plans to analyze the samples in the field, the
tester may analyze the audit samples prior to collecting the emission
samples provided a representative of the compliance authority is
present at the testing site. The tester may request, and the compliance
authority may grant, a waiver to the requirement that a representative
of the compliance authority must be present at the testing site during
the field analysis of an audit sample. The source owner, operator, or
representative may report the results of the audit sample to the
compliance authority and then report the results of the audit sample to
the AASP prior to collecting any emission samples. The test protocol
and final test report shall document whether an audit sample was
ordered and utilized and the pass/fail results as applicable.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) Contents of report (electronic or paper submitted copy). Unless
otherwise specified in a relevant standard or test method, or as
otherwise approved by the Administrator in writing, results of a
performance test shall include general identification information for
the facility including a mailing address, the actual address, the owner
or operator or responsible official (where they are applicable) or an
appropriate representative and an email address for this person, and
the appropriate Federal Registry System (FRS) number for the facility;
the purpose of the test including the regulation requiring the test,
the pollutant being measured, the units of the standard or the
pollutant emissions units, and any process parameter component; a brief
process description; a complete unit description, including a
description of feed streams and control devices, the appropriate source
classification code (SCC), and the latitude and longitude of the
emission point being tested, and the permitted maximum process rate
(where applicable); sampling site description; description of sampling
and analysis procedures and any modifications to standard procedures;
quality assurance procedures; record of operating conditions, including
operating parameters for which limits are being set, during the test;
record of preparation of standards; record of calibrations; raw data
sheets for field sampling; raw data sheets for field and laboratory
analyses; chain-of-custody documentation; explanation of laboratory
data qualifiers; example calculations of all applicable stack gas
parameters, emission rates, percent reduction rates, and analytical
results, as applicable; identification information for the company
conducting the performance test including a contact person and his/her
email address; and any other information required by the test method, a
relevant standard, or the Administrator.
* * * * *
0
25. Revise sections 13.1, 13.4, and 13.4.1 in Method 320 of appendix A
to part 63 to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 63--Test Methods Pollutant Measurement Methods From
Various Waste Media

* * * * *

Test Method 320--Measurement of Vapor Phase Organic and Inorganic
Emissions by Extractive Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy

* * * * *

13.0 Method Validation Procedure

* * * * *
    13.1 Section 6.0 of Method 301 (40 CFR part 63, appendix A), the
Analyte Spike procedure, is used with these modifications. The
statistical analysis of the results follows section 12.0 of EPA
Method 301. Section 3 of this method defines terms that are not
defined in Method 301.
* * * * *
    13.4 Statistical Treatment. The statistical procedure of EPA
Method 301 of this appendix, section 12.0 is used to evaluate the
bias and precision. For FTIR testing a validation ``run'' is defined
as spectra of 24 independent samples, 12 of which are spiked with
the analyte(s) and 12 of which are not spiked.
    13.4.1 Bias. Determine the bias (defined by EPA Method 301 of
this appendix, section 12.1.1) using equation 7:
B = SM - CS (7)
Where:
B = Bias at spike level.
Sm = Mean concentration of the analyte spiked samples.
CS = Expected concentration of the spiked samples.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-20768 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 44)]
[Notices]
[Page 10193-10194]
[DOCID:fr07mr07-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL07-36-000]

Bonneville Power Administration; Notice of Filing

March 1, 2007.
    Take notice that on February 14, 2007, Bonneville Power
Administration filed a petition of declaratory order disclaiming
jurisdiction over the lessor in the proposed lease financing of certain
planned electric transmission facilities, pursuant to section 201 of
the Federal Power Act, and for exemption from filing fee, pursuant to
18 CFR 381.302, and request for expedited consideration no late than
March 16, 2007.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to

serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the
Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 5, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-3994 Filed 3-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 77)]
[Notices]
[Page 20667-20669]
[DOCID:fr21ap06-57]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0167; FRL-8056-4]

Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitions for Establishment of
Regulations for the Residues of Quinoxyfen in or on Various Food
Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide
petitions proposing the establishment of regulations for the residues
of quinoxyfen (5,7-dichloro-4-(4-fluorophenoxy)quinoline in or on head/

leaf lettuce, melon (Subgroup 9A), bell/non-bell peppers, eggplant, and
strawberry.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 22, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0167 and pesticide petition numbers (PP)
3E6755, 5E5959 and 5E6970 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 (7502C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St.,
Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket'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 telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
     Important Note: OPP will be moving to a new location the
first week of May 2006. As a result, from Friday, April 28 to Friday,
May 5, 2006, the OPP Regulatory Public Docket will NOT be accepting any
deliveries at the Crystal Mall 2 address and this facility
will be closed to the public. Beginning on May 8, 2006, the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket will reopen at 8:30 a.m. and deliveries will
be accepted in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. The mail code for the mailing
address will change to (7502P), but will otherwise remain the same. The
Docket telephone number and hours of operation will remain the same
after the move.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0167. 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 Federal 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. 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 in the electronic docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or,

if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket at
the location identified under ``Delivery'' and ``Important Note.'' The
hours of operation for this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney Jackson, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
     2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of each pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition
contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA
section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting
of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA
rules on this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petitions included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the home page

of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on
the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the docket
for the pesticide including the petition summary.

New Tolerances

    1. PP 3E6755. Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 681 U.S.
Highway 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902, proposes to establish a
tolerance for the residues of quinoxyfen (5,7-dichloro-4-(4-
fluorophenoxy)quinoline in or on eggplant at 1.0 parts per million
(ppm); peppers, bell and non-bell at.1.0 ppm;
    2. PP 5E6969. Melon (Subgroup 9A) at 0.1 ppm;
    3. PP 5E6970. Lettuce, head and leaf at 17.0 ppm; and strawberry
at.0.8 ppm.
    A practical analytical method is available to monitor and enforce
the tolerances of quinoxyfen residues in crops. The analytical method
uses capillary gas chromatography and mass spectrometry detector (GC-
MSD) with limits of quantitation (LOQ) of approximately 0.01 ppm. An
independent laboratory has validated the method.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: April 11, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-6012 Filed 4-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


registrant can either fill in the PDF form and print it out (or print
out the blank PDF and fill in the information by hand or typewriter),
and either fax the completed form to<PHONE_NUMBER> or mail it to FDA,
CFSAN Menu and Vending Machine Labeling Registration, White Oak
Building 22, rm. 0209, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
20993.
    (vi) Authorized officials of a vending machine operator who elect
to be subject to the Federal requirements can register by visiting
http://www.fda.gov/food/ingredientspackaginglabeling/labelingnutrition/ucm217762.htm. FDA has created a form that contains fields requesting
the information in paragraph (d) of this section and made the form
available at this Web site. Registrants must use this form to ensure
that complete information is submitted.
    (vii) To keep the establishment's registration active, the
authorized official of the vending machine operator must register every
other year within 60 days prior to the expiration of the vending
machine operator's current

registration with FDA. Registration will automatically expire if not
renewed.
    (e) Vending machine operator contact information. (1) A vending
machine operator that is subject to section 403(q)(5)(H)(viii) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or a vending machine operator that
voluntarily registers to be subject to the requirements under paragraph
(d) of this section must provide its contact information for vending
machines selling covered vending machine food. The contact information
must list the vending machine operator's name, telephone number, and
mailing address or email address.
    (2) The contact information must be readable and may be placed on
the face of the vending machine, or otherwise must be placed with the
calorie declarations as described in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section (i.e., on the sign in, on, or adjacent to the vending machine).
    (f) Signatures. Signatures obtained under paragraph (d) of this
section that meet the definition of electronic signatures in Sec.
11.3(b)(7) of this chapter are exempt from the requirements of part 11
of this chapter.

0
5. In Sec.  101.9, revise paragraphs (j)(2)(ii) and (j)(4) and the
introductory text of paragraph (j)(13)(i) to read as follows:

Sec.  101.9  Nutrition labeling of food.

* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Served in other establishments in which food is served for
immediate human consumption (e.g., institutional food service
establishments, such as schools, hospitals, and cafeterias;
transportation carriers, such as trains and airplanes; bakeries,
delicatessens, and retail confectionery stores where there are
facilities for immediate consumption on the premises; food service
vendors, such as lunch wagons, ice cream shops, mall cookie counters,
vending machines, and sidewalk carts where foods are generally consumed
immediately where purchased or while the consumer is walking away,
including similar foods sold from convenience stores; and food delivery
systems or establishments where ready-to-eat foods are delivered to
homes or offices), Provided, That the food bears no nutrition claims or
other nutrition information in any context on the label or in labeling
or advertising, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c). Claims or other
nutrition information, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c), subject
the food to the provisions of this section;
* * * * *
    (4) Foods that contain insignificant amounts of all of the
nutrients and food components required to be included in the
declaration of nutrition information under paragraph (c) of this
section, Provided, That the food bears no nutrition claims or other
nutrition information in any context on the label or in labeling or
advertising, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c). Claims or other
nutrition information, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c), subject
the food to the provisions of this section. An insignificant amount of
a nutrient or food component shall be that amount that allows a
declaration of zero in nutrition labeling, except that for total
carbohydrate, dietary fiber, and protein, it shall be an amount that
allows a declaration of ``less than 1 gram.'' Examples of foods that
are exempt under this paragraph include coffee beans (whole or ground),
tea leaves, plain unsweetened instant coffee and tea, condiment-type
dehydrated vegetables, flavor extracts, and food colors.
* * * * *
    (13)(i) Foods in small packages that have a total surface area
available to bear labeling of less than 12 square inches, Provided,
That the labels for these foods bear no nutrition claims or other
nutrition information in any context on the label or in labeling or
advertising, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c). Claims or other
nutrition information, except as provided in Sec.  101.8(c), subject
the food to the provisions of this section.
* * * * *

    Dated: November 19, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-27834 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 42 (Friday, March 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12976-12977]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04556]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2006-0042]

CSA Group Testing & Certification Inc.: Grant of Renewal of
Recognition

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the final decision to grant
renewal of recognition to CSA Group Testing & Certification Inc. as a
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL).

DATES: The renewal of recognition becomes effective on March 5, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications, U.S. Department of Labor, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, phone:
(202) 693-2110 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Notice of Final Decision

    OSHA hereby gives notice that it is granting renewal of recognition
of CSA Group Testing & Certification Inc. (CSA) as a NRTL under 29 CFR
1910.7.
    OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets
the requirements in Section 1910.7 of Title 29, Code of Federal
Regulations (29 CFR 1910.7). Recognition is an acknowledgment that the
organization can perform independent safety testing and certification
of the specific products covered within the scope of recognition and is
not a delegation or grant of government authority. As a result of
recognition, employers may use products properly approved by the NRTL
to meet OSHA standards that require testing and certification. OSHA
maintains an informational web page for each NRTL that details the
scope of recognition available at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.
    OSHA processes applications submitted by an NRTL for renewal of
recognition following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. OSHA
conducts renewals in accordance with the procedures in 29 CFR 1910.7,
App. A II.C. In accordance with these procedures, NRTLs submit a
renewal request to OSHA between nine months and one year before the
expiration date of the current recognition. A renewal request includes
a request for renewal and any additional information demonstrating
their continued compliance with the terms of the recognition and 29 CFR
1910.7. If OSHA has not conducted an on-site assessment of the NRTL
headquarters and any key sites within the past 18 to 24 months, it will
schedule the necessary on-site assessment prior to the expiration date
of the NRTL's recognition. Upon review of the submitted material and,
as necessary, the successful completion of the on-site assessment, OSHA
announces the preliminary decision to grant or deny renewal in the
Federal Register and solicits comments from the public. OSHA then
publishes a final Federal Register notice responding to any comments
and renewing the NRTL's

recognition for a period of five years, or denying the renewal of
recognition.
    CSA initially received OSHA recognition as a NRTL on December 24,
1992 (57 FR 61452). CSA's most recent renewal was granted on August 7,
2014, for a five-year period ending on August 7, 2019. CSA submitted a
timely request for renewal, dated August 20, 2018 (OSHA-2006-0042-
0016), and retains their recognition pending OSHA's final decision in
this renewal process. The current addresses of CSA facilities
recognized by OSHA and included as part of the renewal request are:
    1. CSA Group Toronto, 178 Rexdale Boulevard, Etobicoke, Ontario,
Canada M9W 1R3;
    2. CSA Group Montreal, 865 Ellingham Street, Pointe-Claire, Quebec,
Canada
    H9R 5E8;
    3. CSA Group Irvine, 2805 Barranca Parkway, Irvine, California
92606;
    4. CSA Group Edmonton, 1707 94th Street, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
T6N 1E6;
    5. CSA Group Vancouver, 13799 Commerce Parkway, Richmond, British
    Columbia, Canada V6V 2N9; and
    >6. CSA Group Cleveland, 8501 East Pleasant Valley Road, Cleveland,
Ohio 44131.
    OSHA evaluated CSA's application for renewal and made a preliminary
determination that CSA can continue to meet the requirements prescribed
by 29 CFR 1910.7 for recognition.
    OSHA published the preliminary notice announcing CSA's renewal
application in the Federal Register on July 13, 2020 (85 FR 42026). The
agency requested comments by July 28, 2020, and received no comments in
response to this notice. OSHA is now proceeding with this final notice
to renew CSA's NRTL recognition.
    To obtain or review copies of all public documents pertaining to
the CSA's renewal application, go to www.regulations.gov or contact the
Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N-3655,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Docket No. OSHA-2006-
0042 contains all materials in the record concerning CSA's NRTL
recognition. Please note: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Docket
Office is closed to the public at this time but can be contacted at
(202) 693-2350.

II. Notice of Final Decision

    OSHA hereby gives notice of the renewal of recognition of CSA as a
NRTL. OSHA examined CSA's renewal application and all pertinent
information related to CSA's request for renewal of NRTL recognition.
Based on this review of the renewal request and other pertinent
information, OSHA finds that CSA meets the requirements of 29 CFR
1910.7 for renewal of recognition as a NRTL, subject to the specified
limitation and conditions. OSHA limits the renewal of CSA's recognition
to include the terms and conditions of CSA's recognition found in 57 FR
61452. The NRTL scope of recognition for CSA is also available on the
OSHA website at: https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/csa.html. This
renewal extends CSA's recognition as a NRTL for a period of five years
from March 5, 2021.

A. Conditions

    In addition to those conditions already required by 29 CFR 1910.7,
CSA must abide by the following conditions of recognition:
    1. CSA must inform OSHA as soon as possible, in writing, of any
change of ownership, facilities, or key personnel, and of any major
change in their operations as a NRTL, and provide details of the
change(s);
    2. CSA must meet all the terms of the NRTL recognition and comply
with all OSHA policies pertaining to this recognition; and
    3. CSA must continue to meet the requirements for recognition,
including all previously published conditions on CSA's scope of
recognition, in all areas for which it has recognition.
    Pursuant to the authority in 29 CFR 1910.7, OSHA hereby renews the
recognition of CSA as a NRTL.

III. Authority and Signature

    Amanda L. Edens, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the
agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2)),
Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393, Sept. 18, 2020),
and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on March 1, 2021.
Amanda L. Edens,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2021-04556 Filed 3-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P