Environmental Protection Agency September 2005 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Provide a one page overview of your entire project in the following format; pages in excess of one will not be reviewed. (a) Organization: Briefly describe: (1) Your organization, and (2) list your key partners for this grant, if applicable. Partnerships are encouraged and considered to be a major factor in the success of projects. Full details about your organization and staff will be an appendix. (b) Summary Statement: Provide an overview of your project that explains the concept and your goals and objectives. This should be a basic explanation in layman's terms to provide a reviewer with an understanding of the purpose and expected outcomes of your educational project. If a person unfamiliar with your project reads this paragraph and cannot grasp your basic concept, then you have not achieved what is requested here. (c) Educational Priority: Identify which priority listed in Section I you will address, such as education reform or teaching skills. Proposals may address more than one educational priority for the same project; however, EPA cautions against losing focus on projects. Evaluation panels often select projects with a clearly defined purpose, rather than projects that attempt to address multiple priorities at the expense of a quality outcome. (d) Delivery Method: Explain how you will reach your audience, such as workshops, conferences, field trips, interactive programs, etc. (e) Audience: Describe the demographics of your target audience including the number and types you expect to reach, such as teachers and/or students and specific grade levels, health care providers, the general public, etc. (f) Costs: List the types of activities on which you will spend the EPA portion of the grant funds. (2) Project Description: Describe precisely what your project will achievewhy, who, when, how, and with what. Explain each aspect of your proposal clearly and address each topic below. If you choose to reorder the following paragraphs, include the headings below or you risk the possibility of information being overlooked when the project is scored. Please address all of the following to ensure that grant reviewers can fully comprehend and score your project correctly. (a) Why: (i) Explain the purpose of your project and how it will address an educational priority listed in Section I, such as teaching skills. (ii) Identify your environmental issue, such as energy conservation, clean air or water, ecosystem protection, or cross- cutting topics. Explain the importance to your community, state, or Region. If the project has the potential for wide application, and/or can serve as a model for use in other locations with a similar audience, explain how. (iii) Stewardship: Explain how your project will increase environmental stewardship as defined in Section I. (b) Who: Explain who will manage and conduct the project; also identify the target audience, the number to be trained, and demonstrate an understanding of the needs of that audience. Important: Explain your recruitment plan to attract your target audience, and clarify any incentives used such as stipends and continuing education credits. (c) How: Explain your strategy, objectives (outputs and outcomes), activities, and delivery methods to establish that you have realistic goals and objectives and will use effective methods to achieve them. Clarify for the reviewers how you will complete all basic steps from beginning to end. Do not omit steps that lead up to or follow the actual delivery methods; e.g., if you plan to make a presentation about your project at a local or national conference, specify where. (d) With What: Demonstrate that the project uses or produces quality educational products or methods that teach critical-thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making skills. Please note the following restrictions on the development of educational materials.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing a notice of intent to partially delete the Jacobs Smelter Superfund Site, located in Tooele County, Utah, from the National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this notice of intent. Specifically, EPA intends to delete Operable Unit 3 from the site, comprised only of soils within the Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR) right-of-way. The NPL constitutes appendix B to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300, which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 as amended. The EPA and the state of Utah, through the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ), have determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed for the properties subject to the partial deletion. However, this partial deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a direct final notice of partial deletion of the Jacobs Smelter Superfund Site without prior notice of intent to partially delete because we view this as a non-controversial revision and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this partial deletion in the preamble to the direct final partial deletion. If we receive no adverse comment(s) on this notice of intent to partially delete or the direct final notice of partial deletion, we will not take further action on this notice of intent to partially delete. If we receive adverse comment(s), we will withdraw the direct final notice of partial deletion, and it will not take effect. We will, as appropriate, address all public comments in a subsequent final partial deletion notice based on this notice of intent to partially delete. We will not institute a second comment period on this notice of intent to partially delete. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. For additional information, see the direct final notice of partial deletion that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register.

Montana has applied to EPA for Final authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements for Final authorization and is authorizing the State's changes through this immediate Final action. EPA is publishing this rule to authorize the changes without a prior proposed rule because we believe this action is not controversial. Unless we get written comments opposing this authorization during the comment period, the decision to authorize Montana's changes to their hazardous waste program will take effect as provided below. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will publish a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this rule before it takes effect. A separate document in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register will serve as the proposal to authorize the State's changes.

EPA is withdrawing the proposed rule published on September 12, 2005 which proposed approval of a redesignation request and maintenance plan submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the City of Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, and Stafford County (the Fredericksburg area). The Fredericksburg area is currently designated nonattainment for the eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). It is EPA's intent to publish a proposed rule in the near future which will re-propose approval of the redesignation of the Fredericksburg area and the associated maintenance plan, and provide an expanded discussion as to why the redesignation request for this area is approvable under the Clean Air Act.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 2, announces the deletion of the Batavia Landfill Superfund Site (Site), located in the Town of Batavia, Genesee County, New York, from the National Priorities List (NPL) and will consider public comment on this action. The NPL is Appendix B of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300, which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. This Direct Final Notice of Deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the State of New York, through the Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). EPA and NYSDEC have determined that potentially responsible parties have implemented all appropriate response actions required. Moreover, EPA and NYSDEC have determined that the Site poses no significant threat to public health or the environment.

EPA has environmental concerns with the proposed project due to the impacts of noise and vibration on residents living in close proximately to the proposed light rail line and associated train stations. EPA anticipates that more information regarding the mitigation of these impacts will be provided in the FEIS. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20050321, ERP No. D-USA-D11038-PA, Pennsylvania Army National Guard's 56th Brigade Transformation into a Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) , Proposal to Comply with this Directive, near Annville, PA. Summary: EPA expressed concern related to wetland, air quality PM10, noise and forest habitat impacts. EPA requested addition information and mitigation of these issues. Rating EC2.

The Exposure Modeling Work Group (EMWG) will hold a 1-day meeting on October 26, 2005. This notice announces the location and time for the meeting and sets forth the tentative agenda topics.

EPA is approving the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129 State Plan submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (North Carolina DENR) for the State of North Carolina on August 7, 2002, and subsequently revised on December 14, 2004 (State Plan). The State Plan is for implementing and enforcing the Emissions Guidelines (EG) applicable to existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) Units that commenced construction on or before November 30, 1999.

EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the State of Texas. This action removes a provision from the Texas SIP which provided public notice for concrete batch plants which were constructed under a permit by rule (PBR). On September 1, 2000, Texas replaced the PBR for concrete batch plants with a standard permit for concrete batch plants. The standard permit for concrete batch plants also requires public notice for concrete batch plants subject to the standard permit. Texas maintained the public notice requirements of its PBR to assure that proper procedures were followed for concrete batch plants that were permitted under the PBR prior to the effective date of the standard permit. All authorization requests for concrete batch plants which were constructed under the PBR have now been resolved and the public notice and comment provisions under the PBR are no longer needed.

Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated, in accordance with 40 CFR part 53, a new equivalent method for measuring concentrations of particulate matter as PM10 in the ambient air.

EPA issued a final rule in the Federal Register of February 18, 1998, to streamline procedures used to reimburse local governments for emergency response costs. Local governments may be reimbursed for certain costs they incur in taking temporary emergency measures related to releases of hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants. This document is being issued to correct the address to mail the completed application and supporting data provided and the telephone numbers listed in Appendix II to the regulations.

This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the Muscodor albus (M. albus) QST 20799 and the volatiles produced on its rehydration on all food commodities when applied or used for all agricultural applications, including seed, propagule and post harvest treatments. This action is in response to a pesticide petition submitted to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of M. albus QST 20799 and the volatiles produced on its rehydration.

Notice is hereby given that the State of Tennessee is revising its approved Public Water System Supervision Program. Tennessee has adopted drinking water regulations for the Long Term 1 Surface Water Treatment Rule and the Arsenic Rule. EPA has determined that these revisions are no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, EPA intends on approving this State program revision. All interested parties may request a public hearing. A request for a public hearing must be submitted by October 27, 2005 to the Regional Administrator at the address shown below. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing may be denied by the Regional Administrator. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing is made by October 27, 2005, a public hearing will be held. If no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, this determination shall become final and effective on October 27, 2005. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following information: The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and a brief statement of the information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; and the signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.

Under the Acid Rain Program, affected units must hold enough allowances to cover their sulfur dioxide emissions and meet an emission limit for nitrogen oxides. Under 40 CFR 77.6, units that do not meet these requirements must pay a penalty without demand to the Administrator based on the number of excess tons emitted times $2000 as adjusted by an annual adjustment factor that must be published in the Federal Register. The annual adjustment factor for adjusting the penalty for excess emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides under 40 CFR part 77 for compliance year 2005 is 1.5209. This value is derived using the Consumer Price Index (``CPI'') for 1990 and 2005 (as defined at 40 CFR part 72, the 2005 CPI is based on the August 2004 CPI for all urban consumers), and corresponds to a penalty of $3042 per excess ton of sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides emitted. The annual adjustment factor for adjusting the penalty for excess emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides under 40 CFR part 77 for compliance year 2006 is 1.5762. This value is derived using the Consumer Price Index (``CPI'') for 1990 and 2006 (as defined at 40 CFR part 72, the 2006 CPI is based on the August 2005 CPI for all urban consumers), and corresponds to a penalty of $3152 per excess ton of sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides emitted.

The Environmental Protection Agency is extending the comment period for the Public Health and Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada; Proposed Rule which appeared in the Federal Register on August 22, 2003 (68 FR 65120). The public comment period for this proposed rule was to end on October 21, 2005. The purpose of this notice is to extend the comment period to November 21, 2005, and to announce an additional public hearing in Las Vegas on October 6, 2005.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) is announcing the availability of an external review draft of the newly developed All-Ages Lead Model (AALM) Version 1.05, for public review and comment. EPA is releasing this draft model solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review under applicable information quality guidelines. This model has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency policy or determination.

The EPA proposes to grant Final authorization to the hazardous waste program changes submitted by North Dakota. In the ``Rules'' section of this Federal Register, we are authorizing the State's program changes as an immediate final rule without a prior proposed rule because we believe this action as not controversial. Unless we get written comments opposing this authorization during the comment period, the immediate final rule will become effective and the Agency will not take further action on this proposal. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will publish a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this rule before it takes effect. EPA will address public comments in a later final rule based on this proposal. EPA may not provide further opportunity for comment. Any parties interested in commenting on this action must do so at this time.

EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the control of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions in Lake County, Indiana. The SIP revision submitted by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) amends 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) Article 7. Indiana's revised SO2 rule consists of changes to 326 IAC 7-4 which sets forth facility-specific SO2 emission limitations and recordkeeping requirements for Lake County. The rule revision also reflects updates to company names, updates to emission limits currently in permits, deletion of facilities that are already covered by natural gas limits, and other corrections and updates. Due to changes in section numbers, references to citations in other parts of the rule have also been updated. EPA is also approving a request to redesignate the Lake County nonattainment area to attainment of the SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In conjunction with these actions, EPA is also approving the maintenance plan for the Lake County nonattainment area to ensure that attainment of the NAAQS will be maintained. The SIP revision, redesignation request and maintenance plan are approvable because they satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act).

The Director of the Office of Ecosystem Protection, Environmental Protection Agency-Region 1, is today providing notice of availability of the final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permits for certain Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) and other treatment works treating domestic sewage in the States of Massachusetts and New Hampshire and Indian Country Lands located in the State of Massachusetts. These general permits establish notification requirements, permit eligibility conditions, effluent limitations, standards, and prohibitions for discharges to fresh and marine waters. Coverage under these general permits is available to facilities in Massachusetts classified as minor facilities and to facilities in New Hampshire classified as major or minor facilities. Owners and/or operators of POTWs and other treatment works treating domestic sewage, including those facilities currently authorized to discharge under individual NPDES permits, are eligible to apply for coverage under the final general permit and will receive a written notification from EPA whether permit coverage and authorization to discharge under one of the general permits is approved. The eligibility requirements, including the requirement that the facility have a dilution factor equal to or greater than 50:1 in the receiving water, are provided in the general permits. These general permits do not cover new sources as defined under 40 CFR 122.2.

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of fenpropathrin in or on bushberry subgroup 13B; lingonberry; juneberry; salal; pea, succulent; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).

Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires any person who intends to manufacture (defined by statute to include import) a new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on the TSCA Inventory) to notify EPA and comply with the statutory provisions pertaining to the manufacture of new chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to publish a notice of receipt of a premanufacture notice (PMN) or an application for a test marketing exemption (TME), and to publish periodic status reports on the chemicals under review and the receipt of notices of commencement to manufacture those chemicals. This status report, which covers the period from August 15, 2005 to August 26, 2005, consists of the PMNs pending or expired, and the notices of commencement to manufacture a new chemical that the Agency has received under TSCA section 5 during this time period.

This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of pyridaben in or on hop, dried cones; papaya; star apple; sapote, black; mango; sapodilla; sapote, mamey; canistel, fruit, stone, group 12; strawberry; and tomato. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). EPA is also deleting certain pyridaben tolerances that are no longer needed as result of this action.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 2 office, announces the deletion of the Jones Sanitation Superfund Site (Site), located in Hyde Park, New York, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL is appendix B to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300, which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. EPA and the State of New York, through the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), have determined that potentially responsible parties have implemented all appropriate response actions required. Moreover, EPA and NYSDEC have determined that with proper monitoring, operation and maintenance, this Site poses no significant threat to public health or the environment.

This notice announces EPA's progress in meeting its performance measures and goals for pesticide reregistration during fiscal year 2004. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) requires EPA to publish information about EPA's annual achievements in this area. This notice discusses the integration of tolerance reassessment with the reregistration process, and describes the status of various regulatory activities associated with reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The notice gives total numbers of chemicals and products reregistered, tolerances reassessed, Data Call-Ins issued, and products registered under the ``fast-track'' provisions of FIFRA. Finally, this notice contains the schedule for completion of activities for specific chemicals during fiscal years 2005 through 2008.