	SUPPORTING STATEMENT

	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces

(40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na) (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1069.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0029

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the regulations published at 40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na were proposed on June 11, 1973, and promulgated on March 8, 1974. These regulations apply to each basic oxygen process furnace (BOPF) in an iron and steel plant commencing construction, modification or reconstruction after the date of a proposal.  An opacity limit was promulgated on April 13, 1978, as a supplement to the mass standard.  On January 20, 1983, amendments to the Standards of Performance for Primary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces, merged with Standards of Performance for Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Process Steelmaking Facilities (Subpart Na).  Subpart Na is applicable to any top-blown BOPF, hot metal transfer station or skimming station for which construction, reconstruction, or modification commenced after January 20, 1983.  These amendments were promulgated on January 2, 1986.  This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na.

The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements outlined in these rules are similar to those required for other NSPS regulations.  Consistent with the NSPS General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), respondents would submit initial notifications, conduct performance tests and report test results for the primary emission control devices, and submit periodic reports.  Sources also must develop and implement a Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Plan (SSMP) and submit semiannual reports of any event where the procedures in the plan were not followed.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to NSPS.

Any owner/operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least two 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.

 We have determined that there are approximately five respondents which are currently subject to NSPS, subparts N and Na.  Furthermore, we have assumed that one existing BOPF shop, which is not currently a respondent, becomes a respondent over the next three years due to modification/reconstruction related to its furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations.  This information was confirmed with the rule lead addressing this source category at the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS).

For the renewal of this Information Collection Request (ICR), OMB did not request that EPA address any “Terms of Clearance.”

The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of the NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal).  The burden to the “Federal Government” is attributed entirely to work performed by federal employees or government contractors, and may be found in Table 2: Annual Burden and Cost to the Federal/State Government of the NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces  (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal).

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended, to establish standards of performance for new stationary sources that reflect:

. . . application of the best technological system of continuous emissions reduction which (taking into consideration the cost of achieving such emissions reduction, or any non-air quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements) the Administrator determines has been adequately demonstrated.  Section 111(a)(l).

The Agency refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated technology (BDT).  Section 111 also requires that the Administrator review and, if appropriate, revise such standards every four years.

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, particulate matter emissions from primary and secondary emissions from basic oxygen process furnaces cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NSPS were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standards ensure compliance with the applicable regulations which were 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 ensure that 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.

3.  Non-duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na.

3(a)  Non-duplication

 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 (73 FR 31088) on May 30, 2008.  No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register.

3(c)  Consultations

After reviewing our internal data sources and discussing the industry growth rate with the Agency industry experts in the previous renewal, we have determined that additional consultations with industry are inappropriate for this ICR renewal.

These standards were developed with the participation and/or consultation with industry representatives.  In addition, the Agency performed additional reviews to determine additional burden reduction opportunities and as a result of recent rule-making (40 CFR part 60, subpart FFFFF) affecting this source category.

It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received since the last ICR renewal as well as those submitted in response to the first Federal Register notice.  In this case, 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 likelihood of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment and noncompliance would decrease.

3(e)  General Guidelines

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB at 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 the five years.  In addition, EPA would be prevented from pursuing the violators due to the destruction or non-existence of essentials 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 (CBI) (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

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are basic oxygen process furnace shops at iron and steel plants with furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations.  The United States Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes for the respondents affected by 40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes are listed below:

SIC Code and Description

Corresponding NAICS Code and Description

3312 - Steel Works, Blast Furnaces (Including Coke Ovens), and Rolling Mills (except coke ovens not integrated with steel mills

331111 - Iron and Steel Mills; 31221 – Rolled Steel Shape Manufacturing

3315 - Steel Wiredrawing and Steel Nails and Spikes (steel, wire drawing)

331222 - Steel Wire Drawing

3316 - Cold-Rolled Steel Sheet, Strip and Bars

331221 - Rolled Steel Shape Manufacturing

3317 - Steel Pipe and Tubes

33121 - Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube Manufacturing from Purchased Steel

4(b)  Information Requested

(i)  Data Items

All data in this ICR that are recorded and/or reported are required by NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR part 60, subparts N and Na) (Renewal).

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports for 40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na

Notification of construction/reconstruction

60.7(a)(1)

Notification of actual startup

60.7(a)(3)

Notification of physical or operational change

60.7(4)

Notification of monitoring system performance commencement

60.7(5)

Performance test results

60.8 (a)

Notification of performance test

60.8(d)

Demonstration of continuous monitoring system

60.7(a)(5)

Semiannual compliance reports of all measurements over any 3-hour period that average more than 10% below the average level maintained during the most recent performance test in which the facility demonstrated compliance with the standard

60.7(c), 60.143(c-e)

Reports for 40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na

Report of performance test results

60.8 (a)

Semiannual compliance reports of all measurements over any 3-hour period that average more than 10% below the average level maintained during the most recent performance test in which the facility demonstrated compliance with the standard

60.7(c), 60.143(c-e)

A source must maintain the following records:

Recordkeeping for 40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na

Startups, shutdowns, malfunctions, periods where the continuous monitoring system is inoperative.

60.7(b)

Emission test results, continuous monitoring system data, performance test results and other data needed to determine compliance with mass and visible emission limits.

60.7(f), 60.145a

Time and duration of each steel production cycle.

60.143(a)

Record the time and duration of the rates or levels of any diversion of exhaust gases from the main stack servicing the BOPF.

60.143(a)

Record the various rates or levels of exhaust ventilation at each phase of the cycle through each duct of the secondary emission capture system.

60.143a(a)

Record the time and duration of the visible emission data sets.

60.145a(d)

Record the particulate matter concentration (i.e., opacity levels) exiting the control device and discharge into the atmosphere.

60.142(a-b)

Record the pressure loss through the venturi constriction of the scrubber continuously.

60.143(a)(1)

Record the water supply pressure to the venturi scrubber control equipment continuously.

60.143(a)(2)

Records are required to be retained for 2 of years.

60.7(f)

Electronic Reporting

Currently, respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records parameter data (e.g., flow rate and pressure drop).  Although personnel at the affected facility must evaluate the data, this internal automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at the plant 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.

(ii)  Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous monitoring system for pressure loss through the constriction of the venturi scrubber and the water supply pressure to the venturi scrubber.

Perform an initial performance test, Reference Method 5 for determination of particulate matter concentration, Method 9 determination of opacity, Method 2 for determination of the various rates of exhaust ventilation, and repeat performance tests.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing 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.

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.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

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

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Air Facility System (AFS).

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated.  Performance test reports are used by the EPA 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 EPA's 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 two years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

There are no small entities (i.e., small businesses) affected by this regulation since basic oxygen process furnaces are located at iron and steel facilities which are large and very complex facilities.

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to sources subject to NSPS, subparts N and Na, which are 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 over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 1,896 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NSPS program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial	$97.46   ($46.41 + 110%)

Technical	$83.71   ($39.86 + 110%)

Clerical	$42.55   ($20.26 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “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 (O&M) costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor(s) 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)

Continuous Monitoring Device

(B)

Capital/

Startup Cost for One Respondent

(C)

Number of New Respondents

(D)

Total Capital/ Startup Cost

 (B X C)

(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent

(F)

Number of Respondents with O&M

(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

Flow meters to measure exhaust gas flow rate

$18,000

1

$18,000

$900

5.33

$4,797

Flow meters to measure pressure flow rate

0

0

0

$900

4.00

$3,600

Total

$18,000

$8,397

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $18,000.  This cost is based on one BOPF shop incurring a startup cost to monitor the exhaust gas flow rate at the secondary emission control system, as a result of modifications to the BOPF hot metal transfer system.  Startup cost is based on the Continuous Emission Monitoring System Cost Model, Version 3.0.  This is the total of column D in the above table.

The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $8,397.  This cost is based on the O&M costs being 5 percent of the flow monitor cost.  We have also assumed that three operating BOF shops subject to this rule use venturi scrubbers as primary emission control systems and have reportable low pressure.  The other operating BOF shops subject to this rule use an electrostatic precipitator as the primary emission control.  This is the total of column G.

The total respondent costs in block 14 have been calculated as the addition of the capital/startup costs, and the annual operation and maintenance costs.  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 $26,397.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the reported information.  EPA's overall 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 $2,755.

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

Managerial	$56.02  (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6)

Technical	$41.57  (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6)

Clerical	$22.50  (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: (use the complete title of the table), below.

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   5 existing respondents (i.e., BOPF shops) will be subject to the standard.  It is estimated that an additional BOPF shop will become subject to these rules due to modification of its operations over the three-year period of this ICR.  The overall average number of respondents, as shown in the table below is 5.3 per year.

The number of respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

Respondents That Submit Reports

Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

Year

(A)

Number of New Respondents1

(B)

Number of Existing Respondents

(C)

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

	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents

(E)

Number of Respondents

(E=A+B+C-D)

	1

0.33

5

NA

0

5.33

2

0.33

5

NA

0

5.33

3

0.33

5

NA

0

5.33

Average

0.33

5

NA

0

5.33

1 New respondents include sources with constructed, reconstructed and modified affected facilities.

.

To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of this ICR is 5 (rounded).

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity

(B)

Number of Respondents

(C)

Number of Responses

(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports

(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(BxC)+ D

Notification of modification/reconstruction

0.33

1

NA

0.33

Notification of Performance Test

0.33

1

NA

0.33

Report results of performance test

0.33

1

NA

0.33

Semiannual reports

5.33

2

10.66

10.66

Total

11.65

The number of Total Annual Responses is 12 (rounded).  The total annual labor is 1,896 hours (rounded).  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal), attached.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entities are $26,397.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

The average annual Agency burden and cost over the next three years is estimated to be 68 labor hours at a cost of $2,755 (rounded).  See Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost, NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal), attached.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours 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, respectively, and summarized below.

(i) Respondent Tally

The Total Hours Requested is 1,896 hours.  The total annual labor costs are $153,043.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in Table 1.  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost: NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal), attached.  Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 158 hours per response.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $26,397.  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 68 labor hours at a cost of $2,755.  See Table 2: Annual Agency Burden and Cost: NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na (Renewal)), attached.

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the labor hours to the respondents in this ICR compared to the previous ICR.  This is due to two considerations: 1) the regulations have not changed over the past three years and are not anticipated to change over the next three years; and 2) 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, since the previous ICR rounded to the nearest $1,000; this ICR presents cost figures which differ by $397` from the previous ICR due to using exact figures instead of rounding.

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 158 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’s 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-2008-0374.  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 Ave., NW, Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the 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-2008-0374 and OMB Control Number 2060-0029 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: NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Furnaces

(40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal)

	Burden Item

	(A)

Person-

hours per

occurrence

	(B)

No.  of

occurrences

per respondent

per year

	(C)

Person-

hours per

respondent

per year

(C=AxB)

	(D)

Respondents

per year a

	(E)

Technical

person-

hours per

year

(E=CxD)

	(F)

	Management

person-hours per

year

(Ex0.05)

	(G)

Clerical

person-

	hours per year

(Ex0.1)

	(H)

	Cost,$ b

1.  Applications

N/A

2.  Survey and Studies

N/A

3.  Acquisition, Installation,               and Utilization of                         Technology and  Systems

N/A

4.  Reporting Requirements

  A.  Read Instructions

1

1

1

0.33

0.33

0.02

0.03

$30.85

  B.  Required Activities

       Performance Test c

194

1

194

0.33

64.02

3.20

6.40

$5,943.30

       Repeat of Performance

        Test c

194

1

194

0

0.00

0.00

0.00

$0.00

       Daily monitoring of

       emissions and operations

Included in 5E

  C.  Create Information

Included in 4B and 5E

  D.  Gather Existing                              Information

Included in 4B and 5E

  E.  Write report

       Notification of modification          or reconstruction   c

2

1

2

0.33

0.66

0.03

0.07

$61.14

       Notification of  Performance         Test a, c

2

1

2

0.33

0.66

0.03

0.07

$61.14

       Performance Test  Results c

32

1

32

0.33

10.56

0.53

1.10

$982.44

       Semiannual Reports of                  Excess Emissions and                   Monitoring Systems                      Performance d

10

2

20

5.33

106.60

5.33

10.66

$9,896.53

	SUBTOTAL Reporting

182.83

9.14

18.33

$16,975.40

5.  Recordkeeping Requirements

  A.  Read Instructions

Included in 4A

  B.  Plan Activities

Included in 4B

  C.  Implement Activities

Included in 4B

  D.  Develop Record System

N/A

  E.  Time to Enter and                         Transmit Information:  e

       Records of CMS operating

       parameters:

       -  Exhaust ventilation rate f

       -  Across the venturi                      scrubber (i.e., pressure drop          and water supply pressure) g

0.25

365

91.25

5.33

486.36

24.32

48.64

$45,153.06

0.25

365

91.25

4.00

365.00

18.25

36.50

$33,885.88

      Records of performance Test

Included in 4B

      Records of duration of each

      steel production cycle, and            time and duration of any               diversion of exhaust gases             from the main stack serving          the BOPF

0.25

365

91.25

5.33

486.36

24.32

48.64

$45,153.06

       Recalibrate and check                   monitoring devices  h

8

1

8

5.33

42.64

2.13

4.26

$3,958.24

 F.  Time to Train Personnel:

      -  Certification of opacity              observer  i

 8

2

16

5.33

85.28

4.26

8.53

$7,916.92

G.  Time for Audits

N/A

       SUBTOTAL Recordkeeping

1,465.64

73.28

146.57

$136,067.16

Subtotal Labor Burden

1,648.47

82.42

164.85

$153,042.56

TOTAL LABOR  BURDEN AND COST

1,895.74

1,896 (rounded)

$153,042.56

Assumptions:

a We have determined that there are five respondents (i.e., BOPF shops) which are currently subject to NSPS Subparts N and Na.  Furthermore, we have assumed that one existing respondent over the next three years will become subject to NSPS Subpart Na due to modifications/reconstruction related to its furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations.

b  These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 19, 2005, “Table 2: Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.”  The rates are from column 1, “Total Compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry which are technical at $83.71, management at $97.46, and clerical at $42.55.

c We have assumed that the new respondent conducting modifications at its furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations will comply with the notifications requirements of the rule and conduct a successful performance test.

d We have assumed that all five existing respondents will submit semiannual reports with all measurements over any three hour period  (e.g., of low pressure) that average more than 10 percent below the averages during the most recent performance test.

e We have assumed that the respondents are operating 365 days per year, as specified in the NSPS review document.

f We have assumed that all five existing respondents and the new respondent would need to meet the monitoring requirements.

g We have assumed that four existing respondents subject to this rule use venturi scrubbers as primary emission control systems and have reportable low pressure.   The other existing respondents and the new respondent subject to these rules use an electrostatic precipitator as the primary emission control.

h We have assumed that respondents subject to this rule will have to recalibrate monitoring devices on an average of  twice a year to keep them functioning well.  Sources are required to recalibrate and check monitoring devices at least annually and at other times, if required.

i  This burden includes the indirect costs to respondents to provide certification to one observer provided by the state enforcement agency or its contractor.   Certification of opacity observers is valid for a six month period according to Method K.

TABLE 2:  Annual Burden and Cost to the Federal/State Government:  NSPS for Primary and Secondary Emissions from

Basic Oxygen Furnaces (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts N and Na) (Renewal)

	Burden Item

(A)

Person

hours per

	occurrence

(B)

Number  of

occurrences

per plant

per year

(C)

Person hours per plant  per

year

	(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants per  year  a

(E)

Technical hours

per  year

	(E=CxD)

(F)

Management   hours per year

(F=0.05xE)

(G)

Clerical-person

hours per

year

(G=0.1xE)

(H)

Cost, $  b

Report Review:  New Sources  c

  Notification of performance          test  c

2

1

2

0.33

0.66

0.03

0.07

$30.70

  Report of performance test            results   c

8

1

8

0.33

2.64

0.13

0.26

$122.88

  Notification of modification/         reconstruction  c

2

1

2

0.33

0.66

0.03

0.07

$30.70

Report Review: Existing and       New Sources  d

  Semiannual reports of excess        emissions and monitoring             systems performance

5

2

10

5.33

55.33

2.77

5.53

$2,570.68

Subtotal

59.29

2.96

5.93

$2,754.96

TOTAL ANNUAL COST

68.18

$2,754.96

Assumptions:

a  We have determined that there are five respondents (i.e., BOPF shops) which are currently subject to NSPS Subparts N and Na.  Furthermore, we have assumed that one existing BOPF shop over the next three years will become subject to NSPS Subpart Na due to modifications/reconstruction related to its furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations.

b  This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows: Managerial at $56.02  (GS-13, Step 5, $35.01 x 1.6), Technical at $41.57  (GS-12, Step 1, $25.98 x 1.6), and Clerical at $22.50 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.06 x 1.6).  These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2005 General Schedule” which excludes locality rates of pay.

c We have assumed that a respondent conducting modifications at its furnaces, skimming stations and/or hot metal transfer stations will comply with the notifications requirements of the rule and conduct a performance test.

d  We have assumed that all five existing respondents and the new respondent will submit semiannual reports with all measurements over any three hour period  (e.g., of low pressure) that average more than 10 percent below the averages during the most recent performance test.

 PAGE  13


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48811-48812]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21068]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC18-145-000.
    Applicants: Choice Energy, LLC.
    Description: Amendment to August 29, 2018 Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act, et al. of
Choice Energy LLC.
    Filed Date: 9/20/18.
    Accession Number: 20180920-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/04/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2718-031; ER10-2719-031.
    Applicants: Cogen Technologies Linden Venture, L.P., East Coast
Power Linden Holding, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Cogen
Technologies Linden Venture, L.P.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5085.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-15-002.
    Applicants: Rausch Creek Generation, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5079.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1159-002.
    Applicants: Pioneer Transmission, LLC, Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2018-09-21_Pioneer Attachment O
Compliance Filing to be effective 6/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1248-002.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Compliance filing: SCE Compliance Filing Revised WDAT
ER18-1248 to be effective 5/30/2018.

    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5163.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2110-001.
    Applicants: Buckeye Power, Inc., PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to July 31 Filing re NITSA
Among PJM and Buckeye Power, Inc. to be effective 10/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/2018.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5110.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/3/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2457-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. Resource Termination--Clear River
Unit 1.
    Filed Date: 9/20/18.
    Accession Number: 20180920-5149.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2458-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Duke submits Amended and
Restated Interconnection Agreement, SA No. 3141 to be effective 6/30/
2018.
    Filed Date: 9/20/18.
    Accession Number: 20180920-5156.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/11/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2459-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: WAPA Work Performance
Agreement for Cottonwood Airport Reconductoring (RS 228) to be
effective 9/24/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2460-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 205 filing re: Use of
constraint reliability margin values less than 20 MW to be effective
11/21/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2461-000.
    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: MAIT submits five ECSAs,
Service Agreement Nos. 5112, 5113, 5116, 5130, and 5131 to be effective
11/21/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2462-000.
    Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission, LLC, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: MAIT submits five ECSAs,
Service Agreement Nos. 5019, 5020, 5021, 5022, and 5023 to be effective
11/21/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2463-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2018-09-21_SA 3115 LCM-ELL
GIA (C042) to be effective 6/10/2018.
    Filed Date: 9/21/18.
    Accession Number: 20180921-5186.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/12/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 21, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-21068 Filed 9-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 27, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13139-13140]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06072]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2014-0022]

Technical Mapping Advisory Council

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Committee management; notice of Federal Advisory Committee
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Technical
Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) will meet in person on May 15-16, 2018
in Arlington, Virginia. The meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The TMAC will meet on Tuesday, May 15, 2018 from 8:00 a.m. to
5:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), and Wednesday, May 16 from 8:00
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. EDT. Please note that the meeting will close early if
the TMAC has completed its business.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Arlington, Virginia at 3101
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia, 22201. Members of the public who
wish to attend the meeting must register in advance by sending an email
to [email protected] (Attention: Mark Crowell) by 11:00 a.m. EDT
on Tuesday, May 8, 2018. Members of the public must check in at the
front desk on the ninth floor of 3101 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington,
Virginia, 22201; photo identification is required. For information on
facilities or services for individuals with disabilities or to request
special assistance at the meeting, contact the person listed in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT below as soon as possible.
    To facilitate public participation, members of the public are
invited to provide written comments on the issues to be considered by
the TMAC, as listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. The
Agenda and other associated material will be available for review at
www.fema.gov/TMAC by Friday, May 11, 2018. Written comments to be
considered by the committee at the time of the meeting must be received
by Monday, May 14, 2018, identified by Docket ID FEMA-2014-0022, and
submitted by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Email: Address the email to: [email protected] and
CC: [email protected]. Include the Docket ID in the subject line
of the message. Include name and contact detail in the body of the
email.
     Mail: Regulatory Affairs Division, Office of Chief
Counsel, FEMA, 500 C Street SW, Room 8NE, Washington, DC 20472-3100.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Federal Emergency Management Agency'' and the Docket ID FEMA-2014-
0022 for this action. Comments received will be posted without
alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided.
    Docket: For docket access to read background documents or comments
received by the TMAC, go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for
the Docket ID FEMA-2014-0022.
    A public comment period will be held on Tuesday, May 15, 2018, from
1:30 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. EDT and again on Wednesday, May 16, 2018 from
11:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EDT. Speakers are requested to limit their
comments to no more than 3 minutes. Please note that the public comment
periods may end before the time indicated, following the last call for
comments. Contact Mark Crowell, below, to register as a speaker by
close of business on Friday, May 11, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Crowell, Designated Federal
Officer for the TMAC, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472-3100,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, and email [email protected]. The TMAC
website is: http://www.fema.gov/TMAC.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix.
    As required by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of
2012, the TMAC makes recommendations to the FEMA Administrator on: (1)
How to improve, in a cost-effective manner, the (a) accuracy, general
quality, ease of use, and distribution and dissemination of flood
insurance rate maps and risk data; and (b) performance metrics and
milestones required to effectively and efficiently map flood risk areas
in the United States; (2) mapping standards and guidelines for (a)
flood insurance rate maps, and (b) data accuracy, data quality, data
currency, and data eligibility; (3) how to maintain, on an ongoing
basis, flood insurance rate maps and flood risk identification; (4)
procedures for delegating mapping activities to State and local mapping
partners; and (5) (a) methods for improving interagency and
intergovernmental coordination on flood mapping and flood risk
determination, and (b) a funding strategy to leverage and coordinate
budgets and expenditures across Federal agencies. Furthermore, the TMAC
is required to submit an Annual Report to the FEMA Administrator that
contains: (1) A description of the activities of the Council; (2) an
evaluation of the status and performance of flood insurance rate maps
and mapping activities to revise and update Flood Insurance Rate Maps;
and (3) a summary of recommendations made by the Council to the FEMA
Administrator.
    Agenda: On May 15, 2018, the TMAC will discuss the topics
identified in FEMA's 2018 Tasking Memo to the TMAC and confirm
subcommittee leads and subcommittee members for 2018. Each subcommittee
will then meet to formulate the outline for their assigned topic and
chapter in the TMAC 2018 Annual Report. Each subcommittee lead will
then present the preliminary outline for their assigned topic and
chapter in the Annual Report for

Council discussion. On May 16, 2018, the TMAC will continue their
discussion of topics for TMAC attention in 2018, refining the outlines
for each of the chapters in the TMAC 2018 Annual Report, and collecting
requests for subject matter expert briefs to the Council to inform
their topic research. Members of the public will be afforded an
opportunity to comment each day during the meeting (no more than 3
minutes per individual) and prior to any votes. However, the TMAC does
not currently anticipate holding any votes during this meeting of the
TMAC. A detailed agenda will be posted by Friday, May 11, 2018, at
http://www.fema.gov/TMAC.

    Dated: March 19, 2018.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-06072 Filed 3-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16594-16595]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06506]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-1505-000]

Diablo Energy Storage, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced Diablo Energy
Storage, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426 in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a
motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 13, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 24, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-06506 Filed 3-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 187 (Thursday, September 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50829-50830]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20946]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2012-0681; FRL--9998-30-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NSPS for Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units (EPA ICR Number
1926.08, OMB Control Number 2060-0450), to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through November 30, 2019. Public comments were
previously requested, via the Federal Register, on May 6, 2019 during a
60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for
public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below,
including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may
neither conduct nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid
OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 28,
2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2012-0681, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov, or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units (aka: CISWI)
(40 CFR part 60, subpart CCCC) apply to either owners or operators of a
combustion device used to combust commercial and industrial waste, and
that meet either of the following two criteria: (1) Began construction
either on or after December 31, 1999; or (2) began either
reconstruction or modification either on or after June 1, 2001.
Commercial and industrial waste is a solid waste combusted in an
enclosed device using controlled-flame combustion without energy
recovery, which is a distinct operating unit of any commercial or
industrial facility, including field-erected, modular, and custom-built
incineration units operating with starved or excess air, or solid waste
combusted in an air curtain incinerator without energy recovery that is
a distinct operating unit of any commercial or industrial facility.
    Owners and operators of affected incineration units are required to
comply with reporting and record keeping requirements for the General
Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), as well as for the specific
requirements at 40 CFR part 60, subpart CCCC. This includes submitting
initial notifications, performance tests and periodic reports and
results, and maintaining records of the occurrence and duration of any
malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period
during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These reports are
used by EPA to determine compliance with these standards.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: These regulations apply to owners
and operators of Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
(CISWI) units that began construction either on or after December 31,
1999 or began either reconstruction or modification on or after June 1,
2001.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60
subpart CCCC).
    Estimated number of respondents: 30 (total).
    Frequency of response: Semiannually and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 6,520 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $1,160,000 (per year), which includes
$406,000 annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
burden as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
Burdens.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-20946 Filed 9-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 248 (Friday, December 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67280-67281]
[FR Doc No: 2018-28258]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CD19-3-000]

Upcountry LLC; Notice of Preliminary Determination of a
Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and Soliciting Comments and
Motions To Intervene

    On December 20, 2018, the Upcountry LLC filed a notice of intent to
construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, pursuant to section
30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by section 4 of the
Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 (HREA). The proposed Mill
Pressure Reducing Device Project would have a total installed capacity
up to 72 kilowatts (kW), and would be located on the existing raw water
supply pipeline. The project would be located near the City of Portland
in Hood River County, Oregon.
    Applicant Contact: Jonathon Munk, Upcountry LLC, 1675 Country Club
Road, Hood River, OR 97031, Phone No<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Robert Bell, Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed
project would consist of: (1) A 72-kW turbine-generator connected to an
existing raw water supply pipeline and (2) appurtenant facilities. The
proposed project would have an estimated annual generation of up to 630
megawatt-hours.
    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined
or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

                          Table 1--Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Satisfies  (Y/
                      Statutory provision                                 Description                   N)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by HREA...........................  The conduit the facility uses                 Y
                                                                 is a tunnel, canal, pipeline,
                                                                 aqueduct, flume, ditch, or
                                                                 similar manmade water
                                                                 conveyance that is operated
                                                                 for the distribution of water
                                                                 for agricultural, municipal,
                                                                 or industrial consumption and
                                                                 not primarily for the
                                                                 generation of electricity.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended by HREA........................  The facility is constructed,                  Y
                                                                 operated, or maintained for
                                                                 the generation of electric
                                                                 power and uses for such
                                                                 generation only the
                                                                 hydroelectric potential of a
                                                                 non-federally owned conduit.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended by HREA.......................  The facility has an installed                 Y
                                                                 capacity that does not exceed
                                                                 5 megawatts.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as amended by HREA......................  On or before August 9, 2013,                  Y
                                                                 the facility is not licensed,
                                                                 or exempted from the licensing
                                                                 requirements of Part I of the
                                                                 FPA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Preliminary Determination: The proposed Mill Pressure Reducing
Device Project will not interfere with the primary purpose of the
conduit, which is to transport water for irrigation by filling an
equalizing reservoir, which in turn provides pressure for an irrigation
zone in its service area. Therefore, based upon the above criteria,
Commission staff preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies
the requirements for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is
not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing.
    Comments and Motions To Intervene: Deadline for filing comments
contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying

criteria is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the
issuance date of this notice.
    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance
with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.
    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR A
CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY or MOTION TO INTERVENE, as applicable; (2)
state in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number
of the application to which the filing responds; (3) state the name,
address, and telephone number of the person filing; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through 385.2005 of
the Commission's regulations.\1\ All comments contesting Commission
staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets the
qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. A copy of all other filings in
reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service
on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in
this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can
be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed
and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A,
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be
viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using
the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number (i.e., CD19-3) in the docket
number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-
866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call (202)
502-8659.

    Dated: December 20, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-28258 Filed 12-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 72826]
[DOCID:fr07de05-77]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Membership of Performance Review Board for Senior
Executives (PRB)

November 28, 2005.
    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby provides notice of
the membership of its Performance Review Board (PRB) for the
Commission's Senior Executive Service (SES) members. The function of
this board is to make recommendations relating to the performance of
senior executives in the Commission. This action is undertaken in
accordance with Title 5, U.S.C., section 4314(c)(4). The Commission's
PRB will add the following member: Susan J. Court.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6929 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


EPA's FRM on importation ban on pre-charged products

Lee, Amanda I.

to:

Thompson, John E \(OES\), Finman, Hodayah H \(OES\), Buffa, Nicole, Smith,

Russell, MacNeil, John S., Holman, Keith W., Bromberg, Kevin L., Cohen,

Daniel

10/14/2009 03:32 PM

	Cc:

	Cindy Newberg, Julius Banks, "Kymn, Christine J."

Hi all,

Please find attached EPA’s final rule on ban on importation of pre-charged

products.  Please submit your comments by COB October 30, 2009.  As usual,

many apologies for a short time frame to review.

Also, please plan on having a conference call on November 4 to discuss

your major concerns.  You’ll have another opportunity to discuss other

and/or follow-up concerns at a later date.

Many thanks!

Amanda

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

	Tentative: EPA's ban on importation of pre-charged products FRM

	Wed 11/04/2009 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM

	Attendance is  for Julius Banks

	Chair:

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

	Location:

	Conference Call

This entry has an alarm. The alarm will go off   before the entry starts.

Required:

Cindy Newberg/DC/USEPA/US, Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US,

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS> Optional:

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------

comments on the pre-charged ban FRM

Lee, Amanda I.

to:

Julius Banks, Cindy Newberg, Ross Brennan

11/02/2009 01:25 PM

	Cc:

	"Wolverton, Maryann", "Klemick, Heather E.", "Poster, Dianne L.", "Smith,

Russell", "Mancini, Dominic J."

Hi all,

Please find EOP comments on the pre-charged products rule.  More comments

forthcoming.  More detailed suggestions embedded in the attachment.

I have not received any other comment.

Thanks,

Amanda

The intent of this rule is unclear when considered in the context of other

existing and proposed rules dealing with HCFCs.  EPA has already

implemented what is, in effect, a cap-and-trade program for HCFCs, under

which producers must submit tradable production and consumption

allowances. The concurrent HCFC Allocation Rule already establishes a cap

on the production and consumption of these HCFCs over 2010-2014.

Furthermore, a 2006 rule already prohibits the production or import of

these HCFCs for use in these appliances after Jan. 1, 2010.  Thus, as far

as I understand it, this rule is basically duplicative of these efforts.

The redundancy of the rule implies that there are no environmental

benefits associated with banning the sale of these products.  When the

rule estimates the benefits in terms of reduced emission of HCFC, there is

minimal discussion of the fact that if HCFC production is already capped,

a rule further restricting their use cannot entail environmental benefits.

The HCFCs that would not be used in refrigerators and A/Cs will simply be

used elsewhere in the economy, so it is not appropriate to claim that

emissions will be averted as a result.  If market would respond to the

HCFC cap by phasing out the use of these products on a similar timeline,

then the costs of the rule are also limited but would include any

administrative costs to firms and EPA of carrying out the rule (e.g.,

verification, paperwork, etc.).   The $40-50 million cost estimated could

thus be an overestimate. The true cost of the rule should reflect the cost

to society from switching from HCFCs to lower-ODP substitutes if

manufacturers would not already do so under the existing HCFC

cap-and-trade program. The discussion of these issues in the rule is

inadequate.

In addition, if this rule were nonbinding, there could be environmental

costs associated with climate change.  HFCs, the main substitute for HCFCs

in these products, have an ODP of zero but a higher GWP than HCFCs.

HFC-containing appliances are generally more energy efficient, however,

which could offset the higher GWP of direct refrigerant emissions. The

lifecycle GHG impacts of replacing HCFCs with HFCs should be discussed in

the rule.

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

Re: comments on the pre-charged ban FRM

Julius Banks

to:

Lee, Amanda I.

11/03/2009 05:39 PM

	Cc:

	Cindy Newberg, Ross Brennan, "Wolverton, Maryann", "Klemick, Heather E.",

"Poster, Dianne L.", "Smith, Russell", "Mancini, Dominic J."

Amanda,

I believe that you received the the latest PCA memo analyzing the

additional benefits attributed to the precharged products FRM (attached).

It conservatively estimates the additional benefits of prohibiting the

import and/or sale of HCFC-22 precharged appliances and components.

In the absence of the precharged FRM such import and sale of equipment

would be allowed in the U.S. (the allocation FRM does not address

import/export or sale of products containing HCFCs), thus skewing

estimates for the future domestic need of HCFCs allocated for servicing

existing equipment. Avoided emissions are estimated to include quantities

of HCFCs that would be needed to service such equipment and emissions

during end-of-life of such equipment.

The precharged FRM closes a potential loophole that would exist if

domestic equipment manufacturers cannot use virgin HCFCs in their new

equipment (as discussed in your email below).  The aforementioned

discussion addresses the domestic manufacture of equipment with virgin

HCFCs, but does not address similar equipment that is charged with

refrigerant abroad and later imported into the U.S.  The precharged FRM

levels the playing field by not allowing import/export of such precharged

products; it is worth noting that we allow flexibility to manufacturers to

continue to build and import/export such equipment as long as it is not

charged with virgin HCFCs.  If such equipment is manufactured "dry" or

without refrigerant, we would have greater certainty that this equipment

is being used to service existing appliances and that such equipment uses

allocated virgin HCFCs deemed for service or reclaimed HCFCs.

Julius Banks

Team Lead, Refrigerant Recovery and Recycling Prog.

Stratospheric Protection Division

tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/608/608fact.html

-----"Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>wrote: -----

To: Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Cindy Newberg/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ross

Brennan/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

From: "Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Date: 11/02/2009 01:24PM

cc: "Wolverton, Maryann"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Klemick,

Heather E."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Poster, Dianne L."

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Smith, Russell"

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Mancini, Dominic J."

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Subject: comments on the pre-charged ban FRM

Hi all,

Please find EOP comments on the pre-charged products rule.  More comments

forthcoming.  More detailed suggestions embedded in the attachment.

I have not received any other comment.

Thanks,

Amanda

The intent of this rule is unclear when considered in the context of other

existing and proposed rules dealing with HCFCs.  EPA has already

implemented what is, in effect, a cap-and-trade program for HCFCs, under

which producers must submit tradable production and consumption

allowances. The concurrent HCFC Allocation Rule already establishes a cap

on the production and consumption of these HCFCs over 2010-2014.

Furthermore, a 2006 rule already prohibits the production or import of

these HCFCs for use in these appliances after Jan. 1, 2010.  Thus, as far

as I understand it, this rule is basically duplicative of these efforts.

The redundancy of the rule implies that there are no environmental

benefits associated with banning the sale of these products.  When the

rule estimates the benefits in terms of reduced emission of HCFC, there is

minimal discussion of the fact that if HCFC production is already capped,

a rule further restricting their use cannot entail environmental benefits.

The HCFCs that would not be used in refrigerators and A/Cs will simply be

used elsewhere in the economy, so it is not appropriate to claim that

emissions will be averted as a result.  If market would respond to the

HCFC cap by phasing out the use of these products on a similar timeline,

then the costs of the rule are also limited but would include any

administrative costs to firms and EPA of carrying out the rule (e.g.,

verification, paperwork, etc.).   The $40-50 million cost estimated could

thus be an overestimate. The true cost of the rule should reflect the cost

to society from switching from HCFCs to lower-ODP substitutes if

manufacturers would not already do so under the existing HCFC

cap-and-trade program . The discussion of these issues in the rule is

inadequate.

In addition, if this rule were nonbinding, there could be environmental

costs associated with climate change.  HFCs, the main substitute for HCFCs

in these products, have an ODP of zero but a higher GWP than HCFCs.

HFC-containing appliances are generally more energy efficient, however,

which could offset the higher GWP of direct refrigerant emissions. The

lifecycle GHG impacts of replacing HCFCs with HFCs should be discussed in

the rule.

[attachment "2010_PCA-SAN_5052_Final_Rule_11022009.doc" removed by Julius

Banks/DC/USEPA/US]----- Forwarded by Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US on

12/07/2009 12:48 PM -----

Updated version of pre-charged ban FRM

Julius Banks

to:

Lee, Amanda I.

11/18/2009 02:30 PM

	Cc:

	Cindy Newberg, Diane McConkey

Amanda,

Welcome back. I have attached an updated version of the pre-charged

appliance final rule (tracked changes version and a clean version).  I

believe that we have addressed comments raised by EOP and SBA.  I believe

that Kevin Bromberg provided a verbal concurrence on November 17.

 I look forward to continued progress upon your return.

Regards,

Julius Banks

Team Lead, Refrigerant Recovery and Recycling Prog.

Stratospheric Protection Division

tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/608/608fact.html

From:	"Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> To:	Julius Banks/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date:	11/04/2009 10:51 AM

Subject:	FW: comments on the pre-charged ban FRM

From: Lee, Amanda I.

Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 1:24 PM

To<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Cc: Wolverton, Maryann; Klemick, Heather E.; Poster, Dianne L.; Smith,

Russell; Mancini, Dominic J.

Subject: comments on the pre-charged ban FRM

Hi all,

Please find EOP comments on the pre-charged products rule.  More comments

forthcoming.  More detailed suggestions embedded in the attachment.

I have not received any other comment.

Thanks,

Amanda

The intent of this rule is unclear when considered in the context of other

existing and proposed rules dealing with HCFCs.  EPA has already

implemented what is, in effect, a cap-and-trade program for HCFCs, under

which producers must submit tradable production and consumption

allowances. The concurrent HCFC Allocation Rule already establishes a cap

on the production and consumption of these HCFCs over 2010-2014.

Furthermore, a 2006 rule already prohibits the production or import of

these HCFCs for use in these appliances after Jan. 1, 2010.  Thus, as far

as I understand it, this rule is basically duplicative of these efforts.

The redundancy of the rule implies that there are no environmental

benefits associated with banning the sale of these products.  When the

rule estimates the benefits in terms of reduced emission of HCFC, there is

minimal discussion of the fact that if HCFC production is already capped,

a rule further restricting their use cannot entail environmental benefits.

The HCFCs that would not be used in refrigerators and A/Cs will simply be

used elsewhere in the economy, so it is not appropriate to claim that

emissions will be averted as a result.  If market would respond to the

HCFC cap by phasing out the use of these products on a similar timeline,

then the costs of the rule are also limited but would include any

administrative costs to firms and EPA of carrying out the rule (e.g.,

verification, paperwork, etc.).   The $40-50 million cost estimated could

thus be an overestimate. The true cost of the rule should reflect the cost

to society from switching from HCFCs to lower-ODP substitutes if

manufacturers would not already do so under the existing HCFC

cap-and-trade program. The discussion of these issues in the rule is

inadequate.

In addition, if this rule were nonbinding, there could be environmental

costs associated with climate change.  HFCs, the main substitute for HCFCs

in these products, have an ODP of zero but a higher GWP than HCFCs.

HFC-containing appliances are generally more energy efficient, however,

which could offset the higher GWP of direct refrigerant emissions. The

lifecycle GHG impacts of replacing HCFCs with HFCs should be discussed in

the rule.

 [attachment "2010_PCA-SAN_5052_Final_Rule_11022009.doc" deleted by Julius

Banks/DC/USEPA/US]

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

Fw: Status check: OMB clearance of HCFC rules

Ross Brennan

to:

Cindy Newberg, JohnB Chamberlin, Jeremy Arling, Staci Gatica, Julius Banks

11/24/2009 09:16 AM

FYI -

_____________________________________________

Ross Brennan, Chief

Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch

Office of Atmospheric Programs

(202) 343-9226

----- Forwarded by Ross Brennan/DC/USEPA/US on 11/24/2009 09:15 AM -----

From:	Ross Brennan/DC/USEPA/US

To:	"Lee, Amanda I."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> Cc:	Drusilla Hufford/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Cindy Newberg/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date:	11/24/2009 09:14 AM

Subject:	Status check:  OMB clearance of HCFC rules

Good morning, Amanda -

I wanted to check on the status of OMB's clearance of the 2010 HCFC

allocation rule and the precharged appliances rule.  We believe that all

interagency comments have been resolved for several days now, and we are

increasingly eager to move the two packages forward for signature.

My understanding of the status of the two rules is as follows:

FDA:  Cleared on October 30.

DoD:  Cleared November 2.

DOE:  Cleared November 3.

State Department:  Cleared November 3, while attending the Meeting of the

Parties in Pt. Ghalib.

SBA:  Cleared November 19.

USTR:  No comments on either of the two interagency drafts of either

package; assume to have cleared.

CEQ:  Cleared in early November; confirmed during phone call November 19.

CEA:  No formal comments; on November 18 EPA called CEA and answered

questions about the rules.

OMB:  EPA revised the health effects language per OMB comment; we assume

all OMB issues have been addressed.

We have sent you the final redline version showing all of our changes

resulting from both rounds of interagency review.

As you can imagine, we are receiving numerous inquires from stakeholders

and our management about the status of the rules and what can be done to

move them forward.

Please let me know what we can do to help you clear the packages.

_____________________________________________

Ross Brennan, Chief

Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch

Office of Atmospheric Programs

(202) 343-9226

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

passback on pre-charged products frm

Lee, Amanda I.

to:

Julius Banks

11/30/2009 04:50 PM

	Cc:

	Cindy Newberg, Ross Brennan, Jeremy Arling

Hi Julius,

Please find attached suggested edits on the pre-charged products FRM.

Happy to chat about them.

Amanda