Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Coalbed Methane Extraction Sector Questionnaire (New), EPA ICR Number 2291.01, OMB Control No. 2040-NEW, 4556-4559 [E8-1344]
Download as PDF
4556
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2006–
0771. Please include a total of 3 copies.
(4) Hand Delivery: Water Docket, EPA
Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OW–2006–0771. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation and
special arrangements should be made.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2006–
0771. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
Dated: January 4, 2008.
www.regulations.gov, including any
Matthew Hale,
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
Director, Office of Solid Waste.
claimed to be Confidential Business
[FR Doc. E8–1312 Filed 1–24–08; 8:45 am]
Information (CBI) or other information
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information through
regulations.gov or e-mail that you
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
consider to be CBI or otherwise
AGENCY
protected. The federal regulations.gov
[EPA–HQ–OW–2006–0771, FRL–8521–2]
website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system, which means EPA will not
Agency Information Collection
know your identity or contact
Activities: Proposed Collection;
information unless you provide it in the
Comment Request; Coalbed Methane
Extraction Sector Questionnaire (New), body of your comment. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends
EPA ICR Number 2291.01, OMB
that you include your name and other
Control No. 2040–NEW
contact information in the body of your
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
Agency (EPA).
you submit. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
ACTION: Notice.
through regulations.gov, your e-mail
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
address will be automatically captured
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
and included as part of the comment
3501 et seq.), this document announces
that is placed in the public docket and
that EPA is planning to submit a
made available on the Internet. If EPA
proposed Information Collection
cannot read your comment due to
Request (ICR) to the Office of
technical difficulties and cannot contact
Management and Budget (OMB). This is you for clarification, EPA may not be
a request for a new collection. Before
able to consider your comment.
submitting the ICR to OMB for review
Electronic files should avoid the use of
and approval, EPA is soliciting
special characters, any form of
comments on specific aspects of the
encryption, and be free of any defects or
proposed information collection as
viruses.
described below.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the index at https://
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in
or before March 25, 2008.
the index, some information is not
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
data and information for the Coalbed
information whose disclosure is
Methane Extraction Sector
restricted by statute. Certain other
Questionnaire, Attention Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OW–2006–0771, by one of the material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
following methods:
publicly available only in hard copy
(1) https://www.regulations.gov.
form. Publicly available docket
Follow the on-line instructions for
materials are available either
submitting comments.
electronically at https://
(2) E-mail: OW-Docket@epa.gov,
Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW– www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Water Docket in the EPA Docket
2006–0771.
(3) Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4203M,
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744, and the telephone number for
the Water Docket is (202) 566–2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Carey A. Johnston at (202) 566–1014 or
johnston.carey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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) Select appropriate entities to
receive the questionnaire in terms of
what units (e.g., well, operator) should
be surveyed; how many should be
surveyed; and the criteria used to select
them;
(iv) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(v) 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.
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
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?
Affected Entities: Entities potentially
affected by this action are operators of
coalbed methane extraction activities.
Title: Coalbed Methane Extraction
Sector Questionnaire (New).
ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 2291.01,
OMB Control No. 2040–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: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to develop regulations,
called effluent guidelines, to limit the
amount of pollutants that are discharged
to surface waters or to sewage treatment
plants. Coalbed methane (CBM)
extraction activities accounted for about
10 percent of the total U.S. natural gas
production in 2004 and are expanding
in multiple basin across the U.S. EPA’s
effluent guidelines do not currently
regulate pollutant discharges from CBM
extraction operations.
CBM extraction requires removal of
large amounts of water from
underground coal seams before CBM
can be released. CBM wells have a
distinctive production cycle
characterized by an early stage when
large amounts of water are produced to
reduce reservoir pressure which in turn
encourages release of gas; a stable stage
when quantities of produced gas
increase as the quantities of produced
water decrease; and a late stage when
the amount of gas produced declines
and water production remains low.
Pollutants often found in these
wastewaters include chloride, sodium,
sulfate, bicarbonate, fluoride, iron,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
barium, magnesium, ammonia, and
arsenic.
EPA identified the CBM sector as a
candidate for a detailed study in the
final 2006 Effluent Guidelines Program
Plan (71 FR 76656; December 21, 2006)
and also identified that it would
develop an industry questionnaire to
support this detailed study and would
seek OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). EPA is
conducting this review to determine if
it would be appropriate to conduct a
rulemaking to revise the effluent
guidelines for the Oil and Gas
Extraction Point Source Category (40
CFR 435) to control pollutants
discharged in CBM produced water.
EPA also noticed it will conduct an ICR
in the preliminary 2008 Plan (72 FR
61343; October 30, 2007). For each
industrial sector, EPA’s planning
process considers four factors:
Pollutants discharged, current and
potential pollution prevention and
control technology options, growth and
economic affordability, and
implementation and efficiency
considerations of revising existing
effluent guidelines or publishing new
effluent guidelines. EPA will use this
ICR to collect technical and economic
information from a wide range of CBM
operations to address these factors in
greater detail than previously (e.g.,
geographical and geologic differences in
the characteristics of CBM produced
waters, environmental data, current
regulatory controls, availability and
affordability of treatment technology
options). See final 2006 Plan (71 FR
76666). Response to the questionnaire is
mandatory for recipients and EPA will
administer the questionnaire using its
authority under section 308 of the CWA,
33 U.S.C. 1318.
In 2007, EPA worked with a range of
stakeholders (e.g., industry
representatives; Federal, State, and
Tribal representatives; public interest
groups and landowners; and water
treatment experts) to obtain the best
available information on the industry
and its CBM produced water
management practices. EPA developed
its outreach sequentially starting with
teleconferences and continued
afterwards with a series of meetings and
site visits in the major CBM basins. In
total EPA contacted over 700 people in
eight states during the 63 outreach and
data collection activities in 2007 and
early 2008 (e.g., meetings,
teleconferences, site visits). See DCN
05354. This outreach helped facilitate
the development of the draft ICR as EPA
incorporated data, comments, and
suggestions from industry and other
stakeholders into the questionnaire
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4557
design prior to this Federal Register
notice.
Burden Statement: The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is
estimated to average 163 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 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 EPA burden estimate is based on
the number of entities receiving the
questionnaire. To reduce the
questionnaire burden, EPA intends to
select a statistical random sample of
entities within the CBM industry. The
resulting sample will minimize both the
burden to respondents in completing
the questionnaire and to the Agency in
managing and effectively utilizing the
data and information supplied by
respondents.
EPA is soliciting comments on its
assumptions for the burden estimate
and its approach to selecting entities for
the questionnaire. EPA is primarily
interested in collecting information
from ‘‘projects’’ but has used state data
on CBM wells for developing the burden
estimates. For purposes of the data
collection, EPA is defining a CBM
project to be comprised of a well, group
of wells, lease, group of leases, or
recognized unit operated as an
economic unit when making production
decisions. (EPA recognizes that industry
has multiple definitions for the term
‘‘project.’’) One reason that EPA is most
interested in economic and technical
data at the project-level, in addition to
well specific data, is because EPA has
observed that most projects handle the
produced water in a single water
management system. EPA also is
interested in information about the
operator of each project. The operator is
the firm or division (if a profit center)
that is responsible for management and
the day-to-day operation of a project.
This operator is generally a workinginterest owner or a company under
contract to the working interest
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
4558
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
owner(s). The working-interest owner
bears the costs of exploration,
development, and operation of the
property and, in return, is entitled to a
share of the mineral production from
the property or to a share of the
proceeds there from.
Although EPA’s primary interest is
about projects and operators, this notice
assumes that wells are the ‘‘entities’’
because complete lists of wells are
readily available. Complete lists are
essential in statistically selecting
random samples of populations. EPA
considers its current list of wells to be
relatively complete. It has used licensed
database information on historic well
production from HPDI, Inc. HPDI, Inc.
compiles information from nearly all of
the oil and gas producing states and
provides detailed data in a consistent
format to clients accessed through a
Web-based query system. This
information includes well identification
information (such as API number, lease
name and number, well name and
number, operator name, location, basin
designation, field, and reservoir/
producing formation), historic
production information (including
summary information on first
production, last production, cumulative
production, and last 12 months
production as well as detailed
information on year-by-year
production), status information (active/
inactive), and operator contact
information (where available). EPA has
supplemented this information with
information publicly available from
States. From these sources, EPA
estimates that approximately 400
operators maintain over 43,000 wells
that were active CBM producers in the
U.S. as of mid-2007.
In estimating the burden, EPA has
assumed that each operator would
answer certain questions only once,
regardless of the number of its wells in
the sample. For purposes of estimating
the burden, EPA also assumed that each
well is equivalent to a single project;
however, operators will only be
required to respond to the project-level
questions once per project, regardless of
the number of wells selected from the
project. EPA’s burden estimate assumes
that the statistical selection of the wells
will result in approximately 400
operators to be selected. EPA further
estimates that the operators will be
required to provide information for
approximately 2,000 projects.
EPA solicits comments and
supporting information that would
allow it to evaluate alternative methods
of selecting the random sample that will
reduce the overall burden. First, EPA
solicits information about publicly
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
available data sources that would permit
EPA to assign wells to individual
projects so that it could select fewer
entities.
Second, EPA solicits comments on
approaches to obtaining project
information from non-public sources.
For example, one approach might be for
EPA to conduct a two-phase
questionnaire that would require all
operators to complete a short
questionnaire (‘‘screener’’) that
identifies all of the projects and links
the wells to each project ID. After
receiving the results, EPA would
statistically select a random sample of
projects to receive a detailed
questionnaire. In order to use this
approach, EPA would require operators
to return the completed screeners
within a short period of time (e.g., 30
days), thereby lengthening the study
schedule by a minimum of three months
(assuming it takes EPA a month to
process the completed screener results
and another month to draw a
representative sample and distribute the
detailed questionnaire). EPA solicits
comments on the two-phase approach
and whether the assignment of all wells
to projects is relatively easy for
operators. EPA also solicits comment on
other approaches that would provide
information to assign wells to projects.
Third, EPA solicits comments on
ways to reduce the burden to operators
with many wells and still collect
information in a manner that will allow
for appropriate statistical inferences to
be drawn from responses. Under the
current assumptions, large operators
may be required to respond for many
wells, thus resulting in a relatively large
burden for them. EPA also is concerned
that it would be collecting more
information than necessary to
characterize practices by the operator.
To reduce burden, one approach might
be for operators to select the wells using
criteria specified by EPA. EPA is
interested in comments about the
appropriate number of wells and
selection criteria.
Fourth, EPA solicits comments on
stratification variables to use in
selecting the random sample. Existing
information about the industry can be
used to improve the questionnaire
design and the precision estimates. One
common technique is to use publicly
available information to group similar
entities together into mutually exclusive
strata. Then, by selecting entities from
each stratum to participate in the
questionnaire, it ensures that the sample
will include entities that have the
various characteristics that are
represented by the different strata.
However, increasing the number of
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
stratification variables also increases the
number of entities selected and the
overall burden. EPA is considering
stratifying by basin, state, and operator
size (e.g., small, large). Incorporating
each additional variable in a statistical
design will provide more information
about the industry; however, more
entities must be selected to provide
statistically representative results. EPA
solicits comments on whether all
variables (e.g., basin, state, operator size
as defined by total CBM production) are
necessary and whether it also should
consider other variables (e.g., type of
coal seams and geology, maturity of
CBM projects as defined by start date).
Fifth, EPA solicits comments on the
extent to which the sample design
should consider location of the CBM
projects within a basin. EPA recognizes
that location of the CBM project may
result in wells being operated
differently within each basin due to
different produced water characteristics,
geology, and available management
options. EPA also recognizes that state
requirements can impact the well
operations and finances. EPA current
statistical design selects wells at random
within each basin, and can be easily
modified to select wells within states.
Because stratification is intended to
distinguish between large groups, and
thus, may not be the best statistical
choice to distinguish between
geographic locations, EPA also is
researching an area-based design that
uses location clusters of wells formed
within the known basins, as well as
within states. EPA then would
randomly select clusters of wells. For
each selected location cluster, EPA
would require that the operators of the
wells to provide information about all of
their projects that fall within the cluster.
Cluster sampling generally results in a
higher burden because more entities
must be selected (initial estimates range
from 1.4 to ten times more), however, it
will allow for more geographic and
geologic representation. EPA solicits
comments on the extent that basins and
states should be considered within the
statistical design. EPA further solicits
comments on the extent to which
statistical design should consider other
geographic and geology features.
Sixth, since the industry is constantly
adding new wells, EPA’s questionnaire
needs to incorporate industry changes
between the time the data were
collected and end of the study. This
may require additional entities to be
selected for the questionnaire. EPA
solicits comments on the extent to
which industry growth should be
considered in selecting the entities for
the questionnaire.
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
Finally, EPA will also use the
questionnaire to collect data to evaluate
potential impacts to small businesses
that might occur due to alternative
produced water management options.
To minimize burden, the only
information requested at the ultimate
parent company level, if different from
the level at which detailed financial
information is provided, is employment
and revenue data. EPA solicits comment
on alternative survey questions to
collect data for EPA’s small business
analyses.
The ICR provides a detailed
explanation of the Agency’s estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential
respondents: 400.
Frequency of response: One-time.
Estimated total average number of
responses for each respondent: One.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
65,100 hours.
Estimated total annual costs:
$2,839,000. This includes an estimated
burden cost of $2,815,000 and an
estimated cost of $24,000 for operational
costs (photocopying and postage).
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: January 17, 2008.
Ephraim S. King,
Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. E8–1344 Filed 1–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Docket# EPA–RO4–SFUND–2008–0001;
FRL–8521–1]
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Dixie Barrel Drum Superfund Site;
Knoxville, Knox County, TN; Notice of
Settlements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Settlements.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Under section 122(h)(1) of the
Comprehensive Environmental
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA), the United States
Environmental Protection Agency has
entered into two settlements for
reimbursement of past response costs
concerning the Dixie Barrel Drum
Superfund Site located in Knoxville,
Knox County, Tennessee for
publication.
DATES: The Agency will consider public
comments on the settlements until
February 25, 2008. The Agency will
consider all comments received and
may modify or withdraw its consent to
the settlements if comments received
disclose facts or considerations which
indicate that the settlements are
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the settlements
are available from Ms. Paula V.
Batchelor. Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–RO4–
SFUND–2008–0001 or Site name Dixie
Barrel Drum Superfund Site by one of
the following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: Batchelor.Paula@epa.gov.
• Fax: 404/562–8842/Attn Paula V.
Batchelor.
• Mail: Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S.
EPA Region 4, SD–SEIMB, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. ‘‘In
addition, please mail a copy of your
comments on the information collection
provisions to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Attn:
Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.’’ Instructions:
Direct your comments to Docket ID No.
[EPA–R04–SFUND–2008–0001]. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4559
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 https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. EPA Region 4 office located at
61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303. Regional office is open from 7
am until 6:30 pm. Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays.
Written comments may be submitted
to Ms. Batchelor within 30 calendar
days of the date of this publication.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paula V. Batchelor at 404/562–8887.
Dated: January 3, 2008.
Melissa D. Waters,
Acting Chief, Superfund Enforcement &
Information Management Branch, Superfund
Division.
[FR Doc. E8–1349 Filed 1–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–-FRL–6695–4]
Environmental Impact Statements and
Regulations; Availability of EPA
Comments
Availability of EPA comments
prepared pursuant to the Environmental
Review Process (ERP), under section
309 of the Clean Air Act and Section
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act as amended. Requests for
copies of EPA comments can be directed
to the Office of Federal Activities at
202–564–7167. An explanation of the
ratings assigned to draft environmental
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4556-4559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1344]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0771, FRL-8521-2]
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Coalbed Methane Extraction Sector Questionnaire (New),
EPA ICR Number 2291.01, OMB Control No. 2040-NEW
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 EPA is planning to submit a
proposed Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). This is a request for a new collection.
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 March 25, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, data and information for the Coalbed
Methane Extraction Sector Questionnaire, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OW-2006-0771, by one of the following methods:
(1) https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
(2) E-mail: OW-Docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2006-0771.
(3) Mail: Water Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode:
4203M, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0771. Please include a total of 3 copies.
(4) Hand Delivery: Water Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0771. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation and special arrangements should be
made.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-
0771. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://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 through
regulations.gov or e-mail that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The federal regulations.gov website 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
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 you send an e-mail comment directly to
EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the index at
https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Water Docket in the EPA
Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Carey A. Johnston at (202) 566-
1014 or johnston.carey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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) Select appropriate entities to receive the questionnaire in
terms of what units (e.g., well, operator) should be surveyed; how many
should be surveyed; and the criteria used to select them;
(iv) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
(v) 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.
[[Page 4557]]
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?
Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
operators of coalbed methane extraction activities.
Title: Coalbed Methane Extraction Sector Questionnaire (New).
ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 2291.01, OMB Control No. 2040-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: The Clean Water Act (CWA) directs EPA to develop
regulations, called effluent guidelines, to limit the amount of
pollutants that are discharged to surface waters or to sewage treatment
plants. Coalbed methane (CBM) extraction activities accounted for about
10 percent of the total U.S. natural gas production in 2004 and are
expanding in multiple basin across the U.S. EPA's effluent guidelines
do not currently regulate pollutant discharges from CBM extraction
operations.
CBM extraction requires removal of large amounts of water from
underground coal seams before CBM can be released. CBM wells have a
distinctive production cycle characterized by an early stage when large
amounts of water are produced to reduce reservoir pressure which in
turn encourages release of gas; a stable stage when quantities of
produced gas increase as the quantities of produced water decrease; and
a late stage when the amount of gas produced declines and water
production remains low. Pollutants often found in these wastewaters
include chloride, sodium, sulfate, bicarbonate, fluoride, iron, barium,
magnesium, ammonia, and arsenic.
EPA identified the CBM sector as a candidate for a detailed study
in the final 2006 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan (71 FR 76656;
December 21, 2006) and also identified that it would develop an
industry questionnaire to support this detailed study and would seek
OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). EPA is conducting
this review to determine if it would be appropriate to conduct a
rulemaking to revise the effluent guidelines for the Oil and Gas
Extraction Point Source Category (40 CFR 435) to control pollutants
discharged in CBM produced water. EPA also noticed it will conduct an
ICR in the preliminary 2008 Plan (72 FR 61343; October 30, 2007). For
each industrial sector, EPA's planning process considers four factors:
Pollutants discharged, current and potential pollution prevention and
control technology options, growth and economic affordability, and
implementation and efficiency considerations of revising existing
effluent guidelines or publishing new effluent guidelines. EPA will use
this ICR to collect technical and economic information from a wide
range of CBM operations to address these factors in greater detail than
previously (e.g., geographical and geologic differences in the
characteristics of CBM produced waters, environmental data, current
regulatory controls, availability and affordability of treatment
technology options). See final 2006 Plan (71 FR 76666). Response to the
questionnaire is mandatory for recipients and EPA will administer the
questionnaire using its authority under section 308 of the CWA, 33
U.S.C. 1318.
In 2007, EPA worked with a range of stakeholders (e.g., industry
representatives; Federal, State, and Tribal representatives; public
interest groups and landowners; and water treatment experts) to obtain
the best available information on the industry and its CBM produced
water management practices. EPA developed its outreach sequentially
starting with teleconferences and continued afterwards with a series of
meetings and site visits in the major CBM basins. In total EPA
contacted over 700 people in eight states during the 63 outreach and
data collection activities in 2007 and early 2008 (e.g., meetings,
teleconferences, site visits). See DCN 05354. This outreach helped
facilitate the development of the draft ICR as EPA incorporated data,
comments, and suggestions from industry and other stakeholders into the
questionnaire design prior to this Federal Register notice.
Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 163
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 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 EPA burden estimate is based on the number of entities
receiving the questionnaire. To reduce the questionnaire burden, EPA
intends to select a statistical random sample of entities within the
CBM industry. The resulting sample will minimize both the burden to
respondents in completing the questionnaire and to the Agency in
managing and effectively utilizing the data and information supplied by
respondents.
EPA is soliciting comments on its assumptions for the burden
estimate and its approach to selecting entities for the questionnaire.
EPA is primarily interested in collecting information from ``projects''
but has used state data on CBM wells for developing the burden
estimates. For purposes of the data collection, EPA is defining a CBM
project to be comprised of a well, group of wells, lease, group of
leases, or recognized unit operated as an economic unit when making
production decisions. (EPA recognizes that industry has multiple
definitions for the term ``project.'') One reason that EPA is most
interested in economic and technical data at the project-level, in
addition to well specific data, is because EPA has observed that most
projects handle the produced water in a single water management system.
EPA also is interested in information about the operator of each
project. The operator is the firm or division (if a profit center) that
is responsible for management and the day-to-day operation of a
project. This operator is generally a working-interest owner or a
company under contract to the working interest
[[Page 4558]]
owner(s). The working-interest owner bears the costs of exploration,
development, and operation of the property and, in return, is entitled
to a share of the mineral production from the property or to a share of
the proceeds there from.
Although EPA's primary interest is about projects and operators,
this notice assumes that wells are the ``entities'' because complete
lists of wells are readily available. Complete lists are essential in
statistically selecting random samples of populations. EPA considers
its current list of wells to be relatively complete. It has used
licensed database information on historic well production from HPDI,
Inc. HPDI, Inc. compiles information from nearly all of the oil and gas
producing states and provides detailed data in a consistent format to
clients accessed through a Web-based query system. This information
includes well identification information (such as API number, lease
name and number, well name and number, operator name, location, basin
designation, field, and reservoir/producing formation), historic
production information (including summary information on first
production, last production, cumulative production, and last 12 months
production as well as detailed information on year-by-year production),
status information (active/inactive), and operator contact information
(where available). EPA has supplemented this information with
information publicly available from States. From these sources, EPA
estimates that approximately 400 operators maintain over 43,000 wells
that were active CBM producers in the U.S. as of mid-2007.
In estimating the burden, EPA has assumed that each operator would
answer certain questions only once, regardless of the number of its
wells in the sample. For purposes of estimating the burden, EPA also
assumed that each well is equivalent to a single project; however,
operators will only be required to respond to the project-level
questions once per project, regardless of the number of wells selected
from the project. EPA's burden estimate assumes that the statistical
selection of the wells will result in approximately 400 operators to be
selected. EPA further estimates that the operators will be required to
provide information for approximately 2,000 projects.
EPA solicits comments and supporting information that would allow
it to evaluate alternative methods of selecting the random sample that
will reduce the overall burden. First, EPA solicits information about
publicly available data sources that would permit EPA to assign wells
to individual projects so that it could select fewer entities.
Second, EPA solicits comments on approaches to obtaining project
information from non-public sources. For example, one approach might be
for EPA to conduct a two-phase questionnaire that would require all
operators to complete a short questionnaire (``screener'') that
identifies all of the projects and links the wells to each project ID.
After receiving the results, EPA would statistically select a random
sample of projects to receive a detailed questionnaire. In order to use
this approach, EPA would require operators to return the completed
screeners within a short period of time (e.g., 30 days), thereby
lengthening the study schedule by a minimum of three months (assuming
it takes EPA a month to process the completed screener results and
another month to draw a representative sample and distribute the
detailed questionnaire). EPA solicits comments on the two-phase
approach and whether the assignment of all wells to projects is
relatively easy for operators. EPA also solicits comment on other
approaches that would provide information to assign wells to projects.
Third, EPA solicits comments on ways to reduce the burden to
operators with many wells and still collect information in a manner
that will allow for appropriate statistical inferences to be drawn from
responses. Under the current assumptions, large operators may be
required to respond for many wells, thus resulting in a relatively
large burden for them. EPA also is concerned that it would be
collecting more information than necessary to characterize practices by
the operator. To reduce burden, one approach might be for operators to
select the wells using criteria specified by EPA. EPA is interested in
comments about the appropriate number of wells and selection criteria.
Fourth, EPA solicits comments on stratification variables to use in
selecting the random sample. Existing information about the industry
can be used to improve the questionnaire design and the precision
estimates. One common technique is to use publicly available
information to group similar entities together into mutually exclusive
strata. Then, by selecting entities from each stratum to participate in
the questionnaire, it ensures that the sample will include entities
that have the various characteristics that are represented by the
different strata. However, increasing the number of stratification
variables also increases the number of entities selected and the
overall burden. EPA is considering stratifying by basin, state, and
operator size (e.g., small, large). Incorporating each additional
variable in a statistical design will provide more information about
the industry; however, more entities must be selected to provide
statistically representative results. EPA solicits comments on whether
all variables (e.g., basin, state, operator size as defined by total
CBM production) are necessary and whether it also should consider other
variables (e.g., type of coal seams and geology, maturity of CBM
projects as defined by start date).
Fifth, EPA solicits comments on the extent to which the sample
design should consider location of the CBM projects within a basin. EPA
recognizes that location of the CBM project may result in wells being
operated differently within each basin due to different produced water
characteristics, geology, and available management options. EPA also
recognizes that state requirements can impact the well operations and
finances. EPA current statistical design selects wells at random within
each basin, and can be easily modified to select wells within states.
Because stratification is intended to distinguish between large groups,
and thus, may not be the best statistical choice to distinguish between
geographic locations, EPA also is researching an area-based design that
uses location clusters of wells formed within the known basins, as well
as within states. EPA then would randomly select clusters of wells. For
each selected location cluster, EPA would require that the operators of
the wells to provide information about all of their projects that fall
within the cluster. Cluster sampling generally results in a higher
burden because more entities must be selected (initial estimates range
from 1.4 to ten times more), however, it will allow for more geographic
and geologic representation. EPA solicits comments on the extent that
basins and states should be considered within the statistical design.
EPA further solicits comments on the extent to which statistical design
should consider other geographic and geology features.
Sixth, since the industry is constantly adding new wells, EPA's
questionnaire needs to incorporate industry changes between the time
the data were collected and end of the study. This may require
additional entities to be selected for the questionnaire. EPA solicits
comments on the extent to which industry growth should be considered in
selecting the entities for the questionnaire.
[[Page 4559]]
Finally, EPA will also use the questionnaire to collect data to
evaluate potential impacts to small businesses that might occur due to
alternative produced water management options. To minimize burden, the
only information requested at the ultimate parent company level, if
different from the level at which detailed financial information is
provided, is employment and revenue data. EPA solicits comment on
alternative survey questions to collect data for EPA's small business
analyses.
The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential respondents: 400.
Frequency of response: One-time.
Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
One.
Estimated total annual burden hours: 65,100 hours.
Estimated total annual costs: $2,839,000. This includes an
estimated burden cost of $2,815,000 and an estimated cost of $24,000
for operational costs (photocopying and postage).
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: January 17, 2008.
Ephraim S. King,
Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. E8-1344 Filed 1-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P