Federal Register Notices

Attachment 7: Federal Register Notices
a) First Federal Register Notice [EPA-HQ-OA-2012-0033;FRL_9674_7] – May 24, 2012
b) Second Federal Register Notice [EPA-HQ-OA-2012-0033;FRL_9706_4] – July 26, 2012
c) Third Federal Register Notice [EPA-HQ-OA-2012-0033;FRL_9527_8] – Feb 7, 2013
d) Fourth Federal Register Notice [EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9828–7] – June 27, 2013

31006

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 101 / Thursday, May 24, 2012 / Notices

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
be sure to identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject
line on the first page of your response.
You may also provide the name, date,
and Federal Register citation.

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

What information collection activity or
ICR does this apply to?
Affected entities: Entities potentially
affected by this action are business or
other for-profit as well as State, Local,
or Tribal governments.
Title: Hazardous Waste Report,
Notification of Regulated Waste
Activity, and Part A Hazardous Waste
Permit Application and Modification
ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 0976.14,
OMB Control No. 2050–0024.
ICR status: This ICR is currently
scheduled to expire on December 31,
2014. An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information,
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40
of the CFR, after appearing in the
Federal Register when approved, are
listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed
either by publication in the Federal
Register or by other appropriate means,
such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in
certain EPA regulations is consolidated
in 40 CFR part 9.
Abstract: The Hazardous Waste
Report Instructions and Forms booklet
is updated every two years, to comply
with the statutory mandate that EPA
conduct a survey of hazardous waste
generation at least every two years. The
report, known as the ‘‘Biennial Report,’’
has been conducted since 1989, every
odd-numbered year, known as the data
collection year. The even-numbered
years are known as the reporting years.
The ICR has been renewed every data
collection year, and the forms have been
made available to respondents at the
beginning of the reporting year.
However, EPA is amending the current
ICR this year so that the booklet for the
next cycle, the 2013 cycle, will be
available at the beginning of the data
collection year. This change is in
response to many requests by States.
The proposed changes to the 2013
booklet include: (1) Some management
method codes will be consolidated in
order to ease reporting, (2) the waste
minimization codes will be revised in
order to assist filers with reporting their
waste minimization activities, and (3)
editorial changes will be made to the
description of some source codes in
order to improve clarity for filers.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:31 May 23, 2012

Jkt 226001

This amendment will not affect the
Notification booklet or the Part A Permit
Application booklet, which are both
part of this ICR.
Burden Statement: The annual
reporting burden for the Hazardous
Waste Report is estimated to average 17
hours per respondent, and includes time
for reviewing instructions, gathering
data, completing and reviewing the
forms, and submitting the report. The
recordkeeping requirement is estimated
to average 4 hours per response and
includes the time for filing and storing
the Hazardous Waste Report submission
for three years.
The annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for the
Notification of Regulated Waste Activity
is estimated to average 2 hours per
response for the initial notification, and
1 hour per response for any subsequent
notifications.
The annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for the Part A
Permit Application is estimated to
average 25 hours per response for an
initial application and 13 hours per
response for a revised application.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements which have subsequently
changed; train personnel to be able to
respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and
review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
The ICR provides a detailed
explanation of the Agency’s estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential
respondents: 56,800.
Frequency of response: biennially,
and on occasion.
Estimated total average number of
responses for each respondent: varies.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
422,633 hours.
Estimated total annual costs:
$16,540,823. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $16,339,984 in
annualized labor cost and $200,839 for
capital investment or maintenance and
operational costs.

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

What is the next step in the process for
this ICR?
EPA will consider the comments
received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will
then be submitted to OMB for review
and approval pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue
another Federal Register notice
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to
OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you
have any questions about this ICR or the
approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Dated: May 10, 2012.
Suzanne Rudzinski,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2012–12628 Filed 5–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9674–7]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Valuing Improved
Water Quality in the Chesapeake Bay
Using Stated Preference Methods; EPA
ICR No. 2456.01, OMB Control No.
20XX—New
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document
announces that EPA is planning to
submit a request for a new Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Before
submitting the ICR to OMB for review
and approval, EPA is soliciting
comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as
described below.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before July 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OA–2012–0033 by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: [email protected].
• Fax: (202) 566–9744.
• Mail: Office of Environmental
Information, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM

24MYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 101 / Thursday, May 24, 2012 / Notices

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OA–2012–
0033. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
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 www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at http://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Nathalie Simon, National Center for
Environmental Economics, Office of
Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax
number: 202–566–2363; email address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
How can I access the docket and/or
submit comments?
EPA has established a public docket
for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OA–2012–0033, which is available
for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person
viewing at the Office of Environmental
Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:31 May 23, 2012

Jkt 226001

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 202–566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OEI Docket is 202–566–
1752.
Use www.regulations.gov 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. Once in
the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in
the docket ID number identified in this
document.
What information is EPA particularly
interested in?
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the PRA, EPA specifically solicits
comments and information to enable it
to:
(i) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the
Agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(iv) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses. In
particular, EPA is requesting comments
from very small businesses (those that
employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA
could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses
affected by this collection.
What should I consider when I prepare
my comments for EPA?
You may find the following
suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as
possible and provide specific examples.
2. Describe any assumptions that you
used.
3. Provide copies of any technical
information and/or data you used that
support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or
costs, explain how you arrived at the
estimate that you provide.

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

31007

5. Offer alternative ways to improve
the collection activity.
6. Make sure to submit your
comments by the deadline identified
under DATES.
7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
be sure to identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject
line on the first page of your response.
You may also provide the name, date,
and Federal Register citation.
What information collection activity or
ICR does this apply to?
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OA–2012–
0033.
Affected entities: Entities potentially
affected by this action are members of
the general public who may be
contacted to participate in the study.
Title: Willingness to Pay for Improved
Water Quality in the Chesapeake Bay.
ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2456.01,
OMB Control No. 2012-new.
ICR status: This ICR is for a new
information collection activity. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information, unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. The OMB control numbers for
EPA’s regulations in title 40 of the CFR,
after appearing in the Federal Register
when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or
by other appropriate means, such as on
the related collection instrument or
form, if applicable. The display of OMB
control numbers in certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR
part 9.
Abstract: On May 12, 2009 the
President signed Executive Order 13508
calling for the protection and restoration
of the Chesapeake Bay. In response to
the Executive Order and other
considerations the Environmental
Protection Agency established Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) of
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for
the Chesapeake Bay. These TMDLs
called for reductions of 25, 24, and 20%,
respectively, of these pollutants (EPA
2011).
The Chesapeake Bay watershed
encompasses 64,000 square miles in
parts of six states and the District of
Columbia. While efforts have been
underway to restore the Bay for more
than 25 years, and significant progress
has been made over that period, the
TMDLs are necessary to continue
progress toward the goal of a healthy
Bay. As might be expected, a program
on this scale is likely to be expensive.
A 2004 report on implementation of the
‘‘tributary strategies’’ proposed under an
earlier plan for Bay restoration

E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM

24MYN1

srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

31008

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 101 / Thursday, May 24, 2012 / Notices

estimated their cost at $28 billion in
capital costs plus an additional $2.7
billion dollars per year in perpetuity for
operating and maintenance costs (Blue
Ribbon Panel 2004). The watershed
states of New York, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia, and
Maryland, as well as the District of
Columbia, have developed Watershed
Implementation Plans (WIPs) detailing
the steps each will take to meet its
obligations under the TMDLs. EPA has
begun a new study to estimate costs of
compliance with the TMDLs. While
these costs may prove high, a multitude
of benefits may also be anticipated to
arise from restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
It is important to put cost estimates in
perspective by estimating corresponding
benefits.
EPA’s National Center for
Environmental Economics (NCEE) is
undertaking a benefits analysis of
improvements in Bay water quality
under the TMDLs, as well as of ancillary
benefits that might arise from terrestrial
measures taken to improve water
quality. As part of this analysis, NCEE
plans to conduct a broad-based inquiry
into benefits using a state-of-the-art
stated preference survey. Benefits from
the TMDLs for the Chesapeake will
accrue to those who live on or near the
Bay and its tributaries, as well as to
those who live further away and may
never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment. The latter
category of benefits is typically called
‘‘non-use values’’ and estimating the
monetary value can only be achieved
through a stated preference survey.
In addition, a stated preference survey
is able to estimate ‘‘use values,’’ those
benefits that accrue to individuals who
choose to live on or near the Bay or
recreate in the watershed. Stated
preference surveys allow the analyst to
define a specific object of choice or suite
of choices such that benefits are defined
in as precise a manner as feasible. While
use benefits of water quality
improvements in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed will also be estimated
through other revealed preference
methods, the stated preference survey
allows for careful specification of the
choice scenarios and will complement
estimates found using other methods.
Participation in the survey will be
voluntary and the identity of the
participants will be kept confidential.
Burden Statement: The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is
estimated to average 0.5 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

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:31 May 23, 2012

Jkt 226001

for a Federal agency. This includes the
time needed to review instructions;
develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes
of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements which have subsequently
changed; train personnel to be able to
respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and
review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
The ICR provides a detailed
explanation of the Agency’s estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential
respondents: 1500.
Frequency of response: once.
Estimated total average number of
responses for each respondent: 1.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
750 hours.
Estimated total annual costs: $
15,975. This includes estimated
respondent burden costs only as there
are no capital costs or operating and
maintenance costs associated with this
collection of information.
What is the next step in the process for
this ICR?
EPA will consider the comments
received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will
then be submitted to OMB for review
and approval pursuant to 5 CFR
1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue
another Federal Register notice
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to
OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you
have any questions about this ICR or the
approval process, please contact the
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Dated: May 2, 2012.
Al McGartland,
Office Director, National Center for
Environmental Economics.
[FR Doc. 2012–12298 Filed 5–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–0209; FRL–9351–1]

Enforceable Consent Agreement
Development for Two Cyclic Siloxanes;
Solicitation of Interested Parties and
Notice of Public Meeting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

EPA is giving notice of a
public meeting to negotiate an
enforceable consent agreement (ECA) to
collect certain environmental
monitoring data on
octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) and
decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5). A
private organization has submitted a
proposed ECA to EPA. EPA has
evaluated the proposal and believes that
proceeding with the negotiation of a
consent agreement is an efficient means
of developing the data, and now solicits
additional persons with an interest in
participating in the negotiations to
notify EPA and announces a public
meeting to initiate negotiations.
DATES: The meeting to initiate ECA
negotiations for D4 and D5
environmental monitoring will be held
on Wednesday, June 27, 2012 from
10 a.m. to 1 p.m.
While this meeting is open to the
public, you must notify EPA in writing
on or before June 25, 2012, if you wish
to be considered an ‘‘interested party’’
and participate in the ECA negotiations
for D4 and D5 environmental
monitoring.
To request accommodation of a
disability, please contact the technical
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATON CONTACT, preferably at least
10 days prior to the meeting, to give
EPA as much time as possible to process
your request.
ADDRESSES: Your written notification
that you wish to participate in the ECA
negotiation must be submitted to the
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
The public meeting to initiate
negotiations on an ECA for D4 and D5
will be held at the Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA East, Room
1117A, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical information contact: Robert
Jones, Chemical Control Division
(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, East Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room
4328G, Washington, DC 20460–0001;
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM

24MYN1

43822

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 144 / Thursday, July 26, 2012 / Notices

received by the Secretary of the
Commission. The communications
listed are grouped by docket numbers in
ascending order. These filings are
available for review at the Commission
in the Public Reference Room or may be

viewed on the Commission’s Web site at
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. For assistance, please contact

Docket No.

FERC, Online Support at
[email protected] or toll
free at (866)208–3676, or for TTY,
contact (202)502–8659.

Communication date

1. CP11–72–000 ..........................................................
2. CP11–515–000 ........................................................
3. CP08–6–000 ............................................................
4. CP11–161–000 ........................................................
Exempt:
1. P–12796–004 ...........................................................
2. P–12690–005 ...........................................................
3. P–2458–000 .............................................................
4. CP11–161–000 ........................................................
5. P–11810–000 ...........................................................
6. CP11–72–000 ..........................................................
7. CP11–161–000 ........................................................
8. OR12–17–000 ..........................................................
9. CP12–72–000 ..........................................................

Presenter or requester

6–27–12
7–9–12
7–11–12
7–13–12

Ryan Bernstein 1.
Michael Mojica 2.
David J. Devine.
Jolie DeFeis 3.

6–21–12
6–22–12
6–27–12
6–27–12
6–28–12
6–28–12
7–5–12
7–6–12
7–11–12

Eileen McLanahan 4.
FERC Staff 5.
Hon. Michael H. Michaud.
Hon. Tom Marino.
Hon. Jeff Duncan.
Hon. Mary L. Landrieu.
Members of Congress 6.
Tex ‘‘Red Tipped Arrow’’ Hall.
Dept. of the Interior Staff.

1 Email

record.
record.
record.
4 Email record.
5 Email record.
6 Hons. Robert P. Casey, Jr. and Tom Marino.
2 Email
3 Email

Dated: July 20, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012–18238 Filed 7–25–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9706–4]

Proposed Information Collection
Request; Comment Request; Valuing
Improved Water Quality in the
Chesapeake Bay Using Stated
Preference Methods (New)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

The Environmental Protection
Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR),
‘‘Valuing Improved Water Quality in the
Chesapeake Bay Using Stated Preference
Methods (New)’’ (EPA ICR No. 2456.01,
OMB Control No. 2010–NEW) to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. On May 24, 2012 EPA
solicited public comments for 60 days
on the proposed ICR. Certain supporting
documents were not available for public
review in the docket during the first 30
days of the comment period, thus EPA
is re-opening the comment period for an
additional 30 days from the publication
of this notice. Public comments are

TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:42 Jul 25, 2012

Jkt 226001

being solicited on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as
described below. This is a request for
approval of a new collection. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before August 27, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OA–2012–0033 online using
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method); by email to
[email protected]; by fax at (202) 566–
9744; or by mail to EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460.
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: Dr.
Nathalie Simon, National Center for
Environmental Economics, Office of
Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax
number: 202–566–2363; email address:
[email protected].

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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 202–566–1744. For
additional information about EPA’s
public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments
and information to enable it to: (i)
Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (iv) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses. EPA will consider the
comments received and amend the ICR
as appropriate. The final ICR package

E:\FR\FM\26JYN1.SGM

26JYN1

TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 144 / Thursday, July 26, 2012 / Notices
will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval. At that time, EPA
will issue another Federal Register
notice to announce the submission of
the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to coordinate Federal and
State efforts to improve water quality in
the Chesapeake Bay. In 2009, Executive
Order (E.O.) 13508 re-emphasized this
mandate, directing EPA to define the
next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and
describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to
implement these actions. In response,
EPA is undertaking an assessment of the
costs and benefits of meeting
established pollution budgets, called
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL), of
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for
the Chesapeake Bay.
The Chesapeake Bay watershed
encompasses 64,000 square miles in
parts of six states and the District of
Columbia. While efforts have been
underway to restore the Bay for more
than 25 years, and significant progress
has been made over that period, the
TMDLs are necessary to continue
progress toward the goal of a healthy
Bay. The watershed states of New York,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia,
Virginia, and Maryland, as well as the
District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs)
detailing the steps each will take to
meet its obligations under the TMDLs.
EPA has begun a new study to estimate
costs of compliance with the TMDLs. A
multitude of benefits may also be
anticipated to arise from restoring the
Chesapeake Bay. It is important to put
cost estimates in perspective by
estimating corresponding benefits.
EPA’s National Center for
Environmental Economics (NCEE) is
undertaking a benefits analysis of
improvements in Bay water quality
under the TMDLs, as well as of ancillary
benefits that might arise from terrestrial
measures taken to improve water
quality. As part of this analysis, NCEE
plans to conduct a broad-based inquiry
into benefits using a state-of-the-art
stated preference survey. Benefits from
the TMDLs for the Chesapeake will
accrue to those who live on or near the
Bay and its tributaries, as well as to
those who live further away and may
never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment. The latter
category of benefits is typically called
‘‘non-use values’’ and estimating the
monetary value can only be achieved
through a stated preference survey.
In addition, a stated preference survey
is able to estimate ‘‘use values,’’ those

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:42 Jul 25, 2012

Jkt 226001

benefits that accrue to individuals who
choose to live on or near the Bay or
recreate in the watershed. Stated
preference surveys allow the analyst to
define a specific object of choice or suite
of choices such that benefits are defined
in as precise a manner as feasible. While
use benefits of water quality
improvements in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed will also be estimated
through other revealed preference
methods, the stated preference survey
allows for careful specification of the
choice scenarios and will complement
estimates found using other methods.
Participation in the survey will be
voluntary and the identity of the
participants will be kept confidential.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities:
Individuals 18 years of age or older,
residing in one of 18 east coast states
and the District of Columbia.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
voluntary.
Estimated number of respondents:
Primary survey: 2,400 respondents; 400
non-response survey.
Frequency of response: one time
collection.
Total estimated burden: 1,034 hours
(per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $24,123 (per
year), includes $0 annualized capital or
operation & maintenance costs.
Dated: July 20, 2012.
Al McGartland,
Director, National Center for Environmental
Economics, Office of Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012–18319 Filed 7–25–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
[Notice 2012–05]

Filing Dates for the Michigan Special
Election in the 11th Congressional
District
Federal Election Commission.
Notice of filing dates for special
election.

AGENCY:
ACTION:

Michigan has scheduled
elections on September 5, 2012, and
November 6, 2012, to fill the U.S. House
seat in the 11th Congressional District
vacated by Representative Thaddeus
McCotter.
Committees required to file reports in
connection with the Special Primary
Election on September 5, 2012, shall file
a 12-day Pre-Primary Report.
Committees required to file reports in
connection with both the Special
Primary and Special General Election on

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

43823

November 6, 2012, shall file a 12-day
Pre-Primary Report, a 12-day PreGeneral Report, and a 30-day PostGeneral Report.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Elizabeth S. Kurland, Information
Division, 999 E Street NW., Washington,
DC 20463; Telephone: (202) 694–1100;
Toll Free (800) 424–9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Principal Campaign Committees
All principal campaign committees of
candidates who participate in the
Michigan Special Primary and Special
General Elections shall file a 12-day PrePrimary Report on August 24, 2012; a
12-day Pre-General Report on October
25, 2012; and a 30-day Post-General
Report on December 6, 2012. (See chart
below for the closing date for each
report).
All principal campaign committees of
candidates participating only in the
Special Primary Election shall file a 12day Pre-Primary Report on August 24,
2012. (See chart below for the closing
date for each report).
Note that these reports are in addition
to the campaign committee’s quarterly
filing in October. (See chart below for
the closing date for each report).
Unauthorized Committees (PACs and
Party Committees)
Political committees filing on a
quarterly basis in 2012 are subject to
special election reporting if they make
previously undisclosed contributions or
expenditures in connection with the
Michigan Special Primary or Special
General Election by the close of books
for the applicable report(s). (See chart
below for the closing date for each
report).
Committees filing monthly that make
contributions or expenditures in
connection with the Michigan Special
Primary or General Elections will
continue to file according to the
monthly reporting schedule.
Additional disclosure information in
connection with the Michigan Special
Election may be found on the FEC Web
site at http://www.fec.gov/info/
report_dates.shtml.
Disclosure of Lobbyist Bundling
Activity
Principal campaign committees, party
committees and Leadership PACs that
are otherwise required to file reports in
connection with the special elections
must simultaneously file FEC Form 3L
if they receive two or more bundled
contributions from lobbyists/registrants
or lobbyist/registrant PACs that
aggregate in excess of $16,700 during
the special election reporting periods

E:\FR\FM\26JYN1.SGM

26JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/pastsips.htm. The adequate
MVEBs are shown in the following
table:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick

Westlund (202) 566–1682, or email at
[email protected] and please refer
to the appropriate EPA Information
Collection Request (ICR) Number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

METROPOLITAN W ASHINGTON AREA
MVEBS 2009 ATTAINMENT PLAN
OMB Responses to Agency Clearance
AND 2010 CONTINGENCY PLAN
Requests
Milestone
year

VOCs
(tons per day)

NOX
(tons per day)

OMB Approvals

EPA ICR Number 0161.12; Foreign
Purchaser Acknowledgment Statement
of Unregistered Pesticides; 40 CFR part
168, subpart D; was approved on 01/04/
Transportation conformity is required 2013; OMB Number 2070–0027; expires
by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act,
on 01/31/2016; Approved without
as amended in 1990. EPA’s conformity
change.
rule requires that transportation plans,
EPA ICR Number 2263.04; NSPS for
Petroleum Refineries for which
programs and projects conform to state
Construction, Reconstruction, or
air quality implementation plans and
establishes the criteria and procedures
Modification Commenced after May 14,
2007; 40 CFR part 60, subparts A and Ja;
for determining whether or not they do.
was approved on 01/07/2013; OMB
Conformity to a SIP means that
Number 2060–0602; expires on 12/31/
transportation activities will not
2015; Approved without change.
produce new air quality violations,
EPA ICR Number 1718.09; Fuel
worsen existing violations, or delay
Quality Regulations for Diesel Fuel Sold
timely attainment of the national
in 2001 and Later Years; Tax-Exempt
ambient air quality standards. The
(Dyed) Highway Diesel Fuel; and Noncriteria by which EPA determines
whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for Road Locomotive and Marine Diesel
Fuel (Renewal); 40 CFR 80.561 and
conformity purposes are outlined in 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA has described the 80.597; and 40 CFR part 80 subpart I;
process for determining the adequacy of was approved on 01/19/2013; OMB
Number 2060–0308; expires on 01/31/
submitted SIP budgets in 40 CFR
2016; Approved with change.
93.118(f) and has followed this rule in
EPA ICR Number 2450.01; EPA’s
making its adequacy determination.
Design for the Environment (DfE)
Dated: January 25, 2013.
Partner of the Year Awards Program;
W.C. Early,
was approved on 01/23/2013; OMB
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
Number 2070–0184; expires on 01/31/
[FR Doc. 2013– 02808 Filed 2– 6–13; 8:45 am]
2016; Approved with change.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
EPA ICR Number 1901.05; NSPS for
Emission Guidelines and Compliance
Times for Small Municipal Waste
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Combustion Units Constructed on or
AGENCY
before August 30, 1999; 40 CFR part 60,
subparts A and BBBB; was approved on
[FRL–9528–1]
01/29/2013; OMB Number 2060–0424;
expires
on 01/31/2016; Approved
Agency Information Collection
without change.
Activities OMB Responses
EPA ICR Number 1061.12; NSPS for
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
the Phosphate Fertilizer Industry; 40
Agency (EPA).
CFR part 60, subparts T, U, V, W and
X; was approved on 01/30/2013; OMB
ACTION: Notice.
Number 2060–0037; expires on 01/31/
SUMMARY: This document announces the 2016; Approved without change.
Office of Management and Budget
EPA ICR Number 1935.04;
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance
Standardized Permit for RCRA
requests, in compliance with the
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
(Renewal); 40 CFR part 267; 40 CFR
3501 et seq.). An agency may not
270.290, 270.300–270.315; was
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
approved on 01/30/2013; OMB Number
required to respond to, a collection of
2050–0182; expires on 01/31/2016;
information unless it displays a
Approved with change.
currently valid OMB control number.
EPA ICR Number 2323.05; NESHAP
The OMB control numbers for EPA
for Chemical Manufacturing Area
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9
Sources; 40 CFR part 63, subparts A and
and 48 CFR chapter 15.
VVVVVV; was approved on 01/30/2013;

2009 ..........
2010 ..........

66.5
N/A

146.1
144.3

9045

OMB Number 2060–0621; expires on
01/31/2016; Approved without change.
John Moses,
Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013– 02761 Filed 2– 6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9527–8]

Information Collection Request
Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request;
Willingness To Pay Survey for
Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily
Load: Instrument, Pre-Test, and
Implementation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency has submitted an information
collection request (ICR), ‘‘Willingness to
Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay Total
Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pretest, and Implementation’’ (EPA ICR No.
2456.01, OMB Control No. 2010–NEW)
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a request for approval of a new
collection. Public comments were
previously requested via the Federal
Register (77 FR 31006) on May 24, 2012
during a 60-day comment period, which
was later extended for an additional 30
days (77 FR 43822). 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 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.
DATES: Additional comments may be
submitted on or before March 11, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID Number EPA–
HQ–OA–2012–0033, to (1) EPA online
using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); by email to
[email protected]; by fax at (202) 566–
9744; 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 protected]. Address
comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public

9046

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices

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: Dr.
Nathalie Simon, National Center for
Environmental Economics, Office of
Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax
number: 202–566–2363; email address:
[email protected].
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 202–566–1744. For additional
information about EPA’s public docket,
visit http://www.epa.gov/ dockets.
Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to coordinate Federal and
State efforts to improve water quality in
the Chesapeake Bay. In 2009, Executive
Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this
mandate, directing EPA to define the
next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and
describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to
implement these actions. The
Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses
64,000 square miles in parts of six states
and the District of Columbia. It is the
largest estuary in the United States and
the third largest in the world. The
Chesapeake Bay’s unique set of
ecological and cultural elements has
motivated efforts to preserve and restore
its condition for more than 25 years.
Significant progress has been made over
that period however, pollution budgets,
called Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs), are necessary to continue
progress toward the goal of a healthy
Bay. The watershed states of New York,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia,
Virginia, and Maryland, as well as the
District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs)
detailing the steps each will take to
meet its obligations under the TMDL.
As part of the next phase of this effort,
EPA is undertaking an assessment of the
costs and benefits of meeting Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), of
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for
the Chesapeake Bay. As an input to the

TMDL benefits study, EPA’s National
Center for Environmental Economics
(NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct
a stated preference survey to collect data
on households’ use of Chesapeake Bay
and its watershed, preferences for a
variety of water quality improvements
likely to follow from pollution
reduction programs, and demographic
information. If approved, the survey
would be administered by mail in two
phases to a sample of 9,140 residents
living in the Chesapeake Bay states,
Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other
east coast states.
Benefits from meeting the TMDL for
the Chesapeake Bay will accrue to those
who live near the Bay or visit for
recreation, those who live near or visit
lakes and rivers in the watershed, and
those who live further away and/or may
never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment. While
benefits from the first two categories can
be measured using hedonic property
value, recreational demand, and other
revealed preference approaches, only
stated preference methods can capture
nonuse benefits (i.e., benefits to those
who may never visit the Bay).
Transferring estimates from other
studies based in other estuaries is not
advised as these results are unlikely to
accurately or completely capture
willingness to pay for TMDL-related
improvements in the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed given the unique character of
this water resource and the goods and
services it provides. Further, there are
limited stated preference studies in the
published literature focusing on the
Chesapeake Bay, and no studies
specifically addressing the
environmental improvements predicted
under the TMDL. This study will
provide policy makers with additional
information on the public’s preferences
for improvements to the Chesapeake
Bay and lakes in the watershed. NCEE
will use the survey responses to
estimate willingness to pay for changes
related to reductions in nitrogen,
phosphorous, and sediment loadings to
the Bay and lakes in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. The analysis relies on state
of the art theoretical and statistical tools
for non-market welfare analysis. The
results of this study will inform the
public and policy makers about the
benefits of improvements to the
Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the
watershed. A non-response survey will
also be administered to inform the
interpretation and validation of survey
responses. Participation in the survey
will be voluntary and the identity of the
respondents will be kept confidential to
the extent provided by law.

The project is being undertaken
pursuant to section 104 of the Clean
Water Act which authorizes and directs
the EPA Administrator to conduct
research into a number of subject areas
related to water quality, water pollution,
and water pollution prevention and
abatement. This section also authorizes
the EPA Administrator to conduct
research into methods of analyzing the
costs and benefits of programs carried
out under the Clean Water Act.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities:
Individuals 18 years of age or older
residing in one of 17 east coast U.S.
states and the District of Columbia.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Voluntary.
Estimated number of respondents:
2,742 total to full survey total (includes
150 from pretest and 2,592 from main
survey. An additional 770 total to nonresponse follow-up survey (50 from
pretest and 720 from full survey
administration).
Frequency of response: One time
collection.
Total estimated burden: 887 hours.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $20,682 (per
year), includes $0 annualized capital or
operation & maintenance costs.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2013– 02763 Filed 2–6– 13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OECA–2012–0655; FRL–9527–9]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment
Request; NSPS for Ammonium Sulfate
Manufacturing Plants (Renewal)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), this document announces
that an Information Collection Request
(ICR) has been forwarded to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval. This is a request
to renew an existing approved
collection. The ICR which is abstracted
below describes the nature of the
collection and the estimated burden and
cost.
DATES: Additional comments may be
submitted on or before March 11, 2013.

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 124 / Thursday, June 27, 2013 / Notices
157.205 of the Commission’s
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR
157.205) a protest to the request. If no
protest is filed within the time allowed
therefore, the proposed activity shall be
deemed to be authorized effective the
day after the time allowed for protest. If
a protest is filed and not withdrawn
within 30 days after the time allowed
for filing a protest, the instant request
shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of
the NGA.
The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings of comments, protests,
and interventions via the internet in lieu
of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)
and the instructions on the
Commission’s Web site (www.ferc.gov)
under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Persons
unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the
protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Dated: June 20, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–15407 Filed 6–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–RCRA–2013–0405, FRL–9829–1]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Information
Requirements for Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

The Environmental Protection
Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR),
Information Requirements for Boilers
and Industrial Furnaces (EPA ICR No.
1361.16, OMB Control No. 2050–0073)
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public
comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection as
described below. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through October 31, 2013. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:12 Jun 26, 2013

Jkt 229001

Comments must be submitted on
or before August 26, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
referencing by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
RCRA–2013–0405, online using
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to [email protected], or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
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:
Peggy Vyas, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery (mail code
5303P), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: 703–308–5477; fax number:
703–308–8433; email address:
[email protected].
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 202–566–1744. For
additional information about EPA’s
public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments
and information to enable it to: (i)
Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (iv) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through
the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses. EPA will consider the
DATES:

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

38713

comments received and amend the ICR
as appropriate. The final ICR package
will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval. At that time, EPA
will issue another Federal Register
notice to announce the submission of
the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
Abstract: EPA regulates the burning of
hazardous waste in boilers, incinerators,
and industrial furnaces (BIFs) under 40
CFR parts 63, 264, 265, 266 and 270.
This ICR describes the paperwork
requirements that apply to the owners
and operators of BIFs. This includes the
requirements under the comparable/
syngas fuel specification at 40 CFR
261.38; the general facility requirements
at 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, subparts
B thru H; the requirements applicable to
BIF units at 40 CFR part 266; and the
RCRA Part B permit application and
modification requirements at 40 CFR
part 270.
Form Numbers: None.
Respondents/affected entities:
business or other for-profit.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
mandatory (per 40 CFR 264, 265, and
270).
Estimated number of respondents: 86.
Frequency of response: on occasion.
Total estimated burden: 238,785
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
Total estimated cost: $43,088,240,
which includes $16,029,240 annualized
labor costs and $27,059,000 annualized
capital or O&M costs.
Changes in Estimates: The burden
hours are likely to stay substantially the
same.
Dated: June 10, 2013.
Suzanne Rudzinski,
Director, Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery.
[FR Doc. 2013–15438 Filed 6–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9828–7]

Additional Documents Available for
Public Review Related to Willingness
To Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay
Total Maximum Daily Load: Instrument,
Pre-Test, and Implementation;
Comment Request
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

The Environmental Protection
Agency has made available for public
review a revised Supporting Statement
and additional documentation related to

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM

27JNN1

38714

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 124 / Thursday, June 27, 2013 / Notices

its recent information collection request
(ICR) submission to OMB entitled
‘‘Willingness to Pay Survey for
Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily
Load: Instrument, Pre-test, and
Implementation’’ (EPA ICR No. 2456.01,
OMB Control No. 2010–NEW). The
additional documents, now available in
the associated docket, are: The Peer
Review Report, the Focus Group and
Cognitive Interview Report and the
Description of Hydrological,
Biochemical, and Ecosystem Models
(Attachment 17 of the revised
Supporting Statement). These
documents may provide useful
information to interested parties
regarding the development and design
of the survey instruments proposed for
this project. Full transcripts of the focus
groups and cognitive interviews were
not prepared and are therefore not
available. Public comments were
previously requested on the ICR via the
Federal Register on May 24, 2012
during a 60-day comment period, which
was later extended for an additional 30
days. An additional 30-day comment
period was initiated upon submission of
the ICR to OMB for review and
consideration. This notice allows for an
additional 30 days of public comments
on the ICR in light of the availability of
the additional documentation.
Additional comments may be
submitted on or before July 29, 2013.

DATES:

Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID Number EPA–
HQ–OA–2012–0033, to (1) EPA online
using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method); by email to
[email protected]; by fax at (202) 566–
9744; 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 protected]. 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.

ADDRESSES:

Dr.
Nathalie Simon, National Center for
Environmental Economics, Office of
Policy, (1809T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax
number: 202–566–2363; email address:
[email protected].

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

18:12 Jun 26, 2013

Jkt 229001

The
revised Supporting Statement, the Peer
Review Report, the Focus Group and
Cognitive Interview Report and the
Description of Hydrological,
Biochemical, and Ecosystem Models are
available in the public docket for this
ICR together with other supporting
documents made available previously
which explain in detail the information
that the EPA will be collecting. 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 202–566–1744.
For additional information about EPA’s
public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to coordinate Federal and
State efforts to improve water quality in
the Chesapeake Bay. In 2009, Executive
Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this
mandate, directing EPA to define the
next generation of tools and actions to
restore water quality in the Bay and
describe the changes to be made to
regulations, programs, and policies to
implement these actions. The
Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses
64,000 square miles in parts of six states
and the District of Columbia. It is the
largest estuary in the United States and
the third largest in the world. The
Chesapeake Bay’s unique set of
ecological and cultural elements has
motivated efforts to preserve and restore
its condition for more than 25 years.
Significant progress has been made over
that period however, pollution budgets,
called Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs), are necessary to continue
progress toward the goal of a healthy
Bay. The watershed states of New York,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia,
Virginia, and Maryland, as well as the
District of Columbia, have developed
Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs)
detailing the steps each will take to
meet its obligations under the TMDL.
As part of the next phase of this effort,
EPA is undertaking an assessment of the
costs and benefits of meeting Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), of
nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for
the Chesapeake Bay. As an input to the
TMDL benefits study, EPA’s National
Center for Environmental Economics
(NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct
a stated preference survey to collect data
on households’ use of Chesapeake Bay
and its watershed, willingness to pay for
a variety of water quality improvements
likely to follow from pollution
reduction programs, and demographic
information. If approved, the survey
would be administered by mail in two

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

phases to a sample of 9,140 residents
living in the Chesapeake Bay states,
Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other
eastern states within 100 miles of the
Atlantic Ocean.
Benefits from meeting the TMDL for
the Chesapeake Bay will accrue to those
who live near the Bay or visit for
recreation, those who live near or visit
lakes and rivers in the watershed, and
those who live further away and/or may
never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment quality of
the Bay. While benefits from the first
two categories can be measured using
hedonic property value, recreational
demand, and other revealed preference
approaches, only stated preference
methods can capture nonuse benefits.
This study will provide policy makers
with additional information on the
public’s preferences for improvements
to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the
watershed. NCEE will use the survey
responses to estimate willingness to pay
for changes related to reductions in
nitrogen, phosphorous, and sediment
loadings to the Bay and lakes in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. The
analysis relies on state of the art
theoretical and statistical tools for nonmarket welfare analysis. The results of
this study will inform the public and
policy makers about the benefits of
improvements to the Chesapeake Bay
and lakes in the watershed. A nonresponse survey will also be
administered to inform the
interpretation and validation of survey
responses. Participation in the survey
will be voluntary and the identity of the
respondents will be kept confidential to
the extent provided by law.
Dated: June 20, 2013.
Shelley Levitt,
Acting Director, National Center for
Environmental Economics.
[FR Doc. 2013–15439 Filed 6–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9828–4]

Public Water System Supervision
Program Approval for the State of
Illinois
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of tentative approval.
AGENCY:

Notice is hereby given that
the State of Illinois is revising its
approved public water system
supervision program for the Ground
Water Rule, the Arsenic Rule and the

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM

27JNN1