Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Ohio; Revised Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX
On June 28, 2004, Ohio submitted an oxides of nitrogen (NOX) State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to EPA which included amended rules in Ohio Administrative Code (OAC). The purpose of the SIP revision is to exclude from the NOX trading program carbon monoxide boilers associated with fluidized catalytic cracking units (FCCU). The revision also allocates additional NOX allowances to the overall budget and to the trading budget to correct a typographical error made in the original rule. Removal of the FCCU boilers from the NOX trading program is an option Ohio has elected to incorporate in its NOX SIP. The Ohio SIP revision addresses some minor corrections in the rules and also incorporates by reference specific elements of the NOX SIP Call. EPA is approving the Ohio request because the changes conform to EPA policy under the Clean Air Act. The collective emissions from these sources are small and the administrative burden, to the states and regulated entities, of controlling such sources is likely to be considerable. Inclusion of these small NOX sources in the NOX SIP Call control program would not be cost effective. EPA proposed approval of this SIP revision and published a direct final approval on January 19, 2005. We received adverse comments on the proposed rulemaking, and therefore withdrew the direct final rulemaking on March 14, 2005.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters: Reconsideration
The EPA is requesting comment on certain aspects of our national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters, which EPA promulgated on September 13, 2004. After promulgation of the final regulations for boilers and process heaters, the Administrator received petitions for reconsideration of certain provisions in the final rule. In this document, the EPA is initiating the reconsideration of some of those provisions. We are requesting comment on certain provisions of the approach used to demonstrate eligibility for the health-based compliance alternatives, as outlined in appendix A of the final rule, and on the provisions establishing a health-based compliance alternative for total selected metals. We are not requesting comment on any other provisions of the final rule. We are not granting petitioners' request that we stay the effectiveness of the health-based compliance provisions of the final rule, pending this reconsideration action.
Approval and Disapproval of Ohio Implementation Plan for Particulate Matter
EPA is proposing action on various particulate matter rule revisions that Ohio submitted on June 4, 2003. EPA is proposing to approve numerous minor provisions that clarify a variety of elements of these rules. However, EPA is proposing to disapprove revisions that provide for use of continuous opacity monitoring data but allow more exceedances of the general opacity limit in cases where an eligible large coal fired boiler opts to use these data for determining compliance. EPA proposes to find that these revisions constitute a relaxation of the opacity rules, and that, contrary to section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, these revisions may interfere with satisfaction of relevant state planning requirements.
Project XL Site-Specific Rulemaking for the Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc. Facility in Spring House, PA Involving On-Site Treatment of Mixed Wastes
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is today finalizing this rule to implement a pilot project under the Project XL program, providing site-specific regulatory flexibility under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended, for the Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc. facility in Spring House, Pennsylvania (OMP Spring House). The principal objective of this XL project is to obtain information helpful to determining whether regulatory oversight by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), or NRC Agreement States, under authority of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) is sufficient to ensure protection of human health and the environment regarding the management of certain small volumes of mixed wastes (i.e., RCRA hazardous wastes that also contain radioactive materials) that are both generated and treated in an NRC-licensed pharmaceutical research and development laboratory. If, as a result of this XL project, the Agency determines that certain small volumes of low-level mixed wastes (LLMW) generated and managed under NRC oversight need not also be subject to RCRA hazardous waste regulations to ensure protection of human health and the environment, EPA may consider adopting the approach on a national basis.
Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants: Bernalillo County, NM; Negative Declaration; Correction
The EPA published in the Federal Register on January 10, 2005, a document concerning approving a negative declaration submitted by the City of Albuquerque (Bernalillo County), New Mexico, which certified that there are no existing commercial and industrial solid waste incineration units in Bernalillo County. This document corrects an error which may prove to be misleading in the regulation.
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Milestones Plans for the Bleached Papergrade Kraft and Soda Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Manufacturing Category (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1877.03, OMB Control Number 2040-0202
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. This ICR is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2005. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. This ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; BEACH Act Grant Program (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 2048.02, OMB Control Number 2040-0244
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. This ICR is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2005. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. This ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.
Proposed CERCLA Administrative Past Cost Recovery Settlement: 47th and Dan Ryan Superfund Site Gustavo and Guadalupe Martinez d/b/a Menchaca Transport Express, and Biddle Sawyer Corporation
In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs (``Agreement''), issued pursuant to Section 122(h)(1) of CERCLA, concerning the 47th and Dan Ryan Superfund Site in Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, between the United States Environmental Protection Agency (``U.S. EPA'' or ``the Agency'') and the following Settling Parties:
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Withdrawal of Direct Final Rule
Due to adverse comments, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule to approve clarifications to the exception provisions of the Maryland visible emissions regulations. In the direct final rule published on April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21337), we stated that if we received adverse comment by May 26, 2005, the rule would be withdrawn and not take effect. EPA subsequently received two adverse comments. EPA will address the comments received in a subsequent final action based upon the proposed action also published on April 26, 2005 (70 FR 21387). EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action.