Environmental Protection Agency 2005 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

This regulation establishes a time-limited tolerance for residues of halosulfuron-methyl in or on sweet potatoes. This action is in response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing use of the pesticide on sweet potatoes. This regulation establishes a maximum permissible level for residues of halosulfuron- methyl in this food commodity. The tolerance will expire and is revoked on December 31, 2008.

EPA has authorized Syracuse Research Corporation's (SRC) subcontractor BeakerTree Corporation, of Fairfax, Virginia, access to information which has been submitted to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be Confidential Business Information (CBI).

This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of a certain pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities.

This regulation establishes a tolerance for combined residues of flonicamid and its metabolites in or on certain plant and livestock commodities. ISK Biosciences requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).

This notice announces EPA's order for the amendment to terminate uses, voluntarily requested by the registrant and accepted by the Agency, of products containing the pesticide thiram, pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. This cancellation order follows an April 27, 2005 Federal Register Notice of Receipt of Request from the thiram registrant to voluntarily amend to terminate uses of thiram in or on apples. These are not the last thiram products registered for use in the United States. In the April 27, 2005 Notice, EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the amendment to terminate uses, unless the Agency received substantive comments within the 30-day comment period that would merit its further review of this request, or unless the registrant withdrew their request within this period. The Agency did not receive any comments on the Notice. Further, the registrant did not withdraw their request. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice a cancellation order granting the requested amendment to terminate uses. Any distribution, sale, or use of the thiram products subject to this cancellation order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order, including any existing stocks provisions.

In this action, EPA is amending a final rule it issued under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) related to the interstate transport of nitrogen oxides (NOX). On April 21, 2004, EPA issued a final rule that required the State of Georgia to submit State implementation plan (SIP) revisions that prohibit specified amounts of NOX emissionsone of the precursors to ozone (smog) pollutionfor the purposes of reducing NOX and ozone transport across State boundaries in the eastern half of the United States. This rule became effective on June 21, 2004. Subsequently, the Georgia Coalition for Sound Environmental Policy (GCSEP or Petitioners) filed a petition for reconsideration requesting that EPA reconsider the inclusion of the State of Georgia in the NOX SIP Call Rule and also requested a stay of the effectiveness of the rule as it relates to the State of Georgia only. In response to this petition, EPA proposed to stay the effectiveness of the April 21, 2004 rule as it relates to the State of Georgia only, while EPA conducts notice-and-comment rulemaking to further address the issues raised by the Petitioners (70 FR 9897; March 1, 2005). Four parties commented on the proposed rule. No requests were made to hold a public hearing. After considering these comments, EPA has determined to finalize, as proposed, the stay of the effectiveness of this rule as it relates to the State of Georgia, only during noticeand comment proceedings for the petition for reconsideration.

This document corrects an error in the amendatory instruction in a final rule pertaining to the Revised Format of 40 CFR part 52 for Materials Being Incorporated by Reference for Minnesota.

The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public meeting of the SAB Aquatic Life Criteria Guidelines Consultative Panel.

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern particulate matter (PM-10) emissions from fugitive dust sources. We are proposing to approve amendments to local rules that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

This action proposes amendments to the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for integrated iron and steel manufacturing. The proposed amendments would add a new compliance option, revise emission limitations, reduce the frequency of repeat performance tests for certain emissions units, add corrective action requirements, and clarify certain monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

With this action EPA is proposing to authorize use of 610,665 kilograms of methyl bromide for supplemental critical uses in 2005 through the allocation of additional critical stock allowances (CSAs). This allocation would supplement the critical use allowances (CUAs) and CSAs previously allocated for 2005, as published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2004 (69 FR 76982). Further, EPA is proposing to amend the existing list of exempted critical uses. With today's action EPA is proposing to exempt methyl bromide for critical uses beyond the phaseout under the authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) and in accordance with the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol). In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of today's Federal Register, we are authorizing these CSAs and critical uses as a direct final rule without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial action and expect no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this authorization in the Preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We will address all public comments in the subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.

In accordance with Section 122(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9622(h), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning the Vega Alta Public Supply Wells Superfund Site located in Vega Alta, Puerto Rico with the settling parties, Caribe General Electric Products, Inc. and Unisys Corporation. The settlement requires the settling parties to pay $858,433.41, plus an additional sum for Interest on that amount calculated from January 28, 2004 through the date of payment to the Vega Alta Public Supply Wells Superfund Site Special Account within the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund in reimbursement of EPA's past response costs incurred with respect to the Site. The settlement includes a covenant not to sue the settling party pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607(a) for past response costs. For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the settlement. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

On May 13, 2005, the Ecology Center of Ann Arbor, Michigan, petitioned EPA under section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to establish regulations prohibiting the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and improper disposal of lead wheel balancing weights. For the reasons set forth in this notice, EPA has denied the petition to initiate rulemaking. In this notice, the Agency elaborates the reasons for its denial and the type of information it may need.

In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (``Act''), 42 U.S.C. (7413(g), notice is hereby given of a proposed Consent Decree to address a lawsuit filed by Our Children's Earth Foundation and the Sierra Club (collectively ``Plaintiffs''): Our Children's Earth Found. et al. v. U.S. EPA, No. C 05-00094 CW (N.D. Cal.). On or about January 6, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that EPA had failed to perform a non-discretionary duty to review and, if appropriate, revise the new source performance standards (``NSPS'') for petroleum refineries and equipment leaks as required by Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7411(b)(1)(B). Under the terms of the proposed Consent Decree, deadlines are established for EPA to review and, if appropriate, revise the NSPS standards for Subparts J, VV and GGG, 40 CFR 60.100-109, 60.480-498, 60.590-593.

Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), EPA establishes national technology-based regulations known as effluent guidelines and pretreatment standards to reduce pollutant discharges from categories of industry discharging directly to waters of the United States or discharging indirectly through Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs). The CWA sections 301(d), 304(b), 304(g), and 307(b) require EPA to annually review these effluent guidelines and pretreatment standards. Today's notice first presents EPA's 2005 review of its existing effluent guidelines and pretreatment standards. It also presents EPA's evaluation of categories of indirect dischargers without pretreatment standards to identify potential new categories for pretreatment standards. CWA section 304(m) requires EPA to biennially publish an effluent guidelines program plan and provide for public notice and comment on such plan. Therefore, this notice also presents the preliminary 2006 effluent guidelines program plan. Included in the preliminary 2006 plan is a solicitation for comments and data on industry categories that may be discharging non-trivial amounts of toxic or non-conventional pollutants and are not currently subject to any effluent guidelines. Finally, this notice provides a second opportunity for public notice and comment on the draft Strategy for National Clean Water Industrial Regulations (``draft Strategy''), see 67 FR 71165 (November 29, 2002).

In a Federal Register notice issued on October 9, 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') requested comment on how it calculates the economic benefit that regulated entities obtain as a result of violating environmental requirements. EPA makes this calculation as a part of establishing an appropriate penalty for settlement purposes. The Agency's policy is that any civil penalty should at least recapture the economic benefit the violator has obtained through its unlawful actions. Because enforcement staff typically use the BEN (short for benefit) computer model to perform the economic benefit calculations, the Agency requested comments on the BEN model as well as the larger benefit recapture issues. In a subsequent Federal Register notice issued on June 18, 1999, EPA responded to the comments on the October 1996 Federal Register notice; provided advance notice of the changes EPA proposed to make to its benefit recapture approach and the BEN computer model; and requested a second round of comment of those proposed changes. This notice responds to the comments on the June 1999 notice and contains the changes EPA will implement in its benefit recapture program.

This document announces that on May 26, 2005, the Environmental Appeals Board (``EAB'') of EPA denied review of a petition for review of a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (``PSD'') permit amendment (``Permit Amendment'') that EPA, Region 10 and the State of Washington's Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (``EFSEC'') issued to Sumas Energy 2, Inc. (``SE2''). The Permit Amendment extends the original PSD permit (``Original Permit'') issued to SE2 for construction and operation of the SE2 electric generating facility (``Facility''). The Permit Amendment was issued pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21.

This document announces that on June 21, 2005, the Environmental Appeals Board (``EAB'') of EPA denied review of a petition for review of a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (``PSD'') permit (``Permit'') that EPA Region 10 and the State of Washington's Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (``EFSEC'') issued to BP West Coast Products, L.L.C. (``BP'') for construction and operation of the BP Cherry Point Cogeneration Facility (``Facility''), a natural gas-fired cogeneration facility. The Permit was issued pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21.

EPA is revising the format of part 52 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR part 52) for materials submitted by Chattanooga, Tennessee that are incorporated by reference (IBR) into the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The regulations affected by this format change have all been previously submitted by the local agency and approved by EPA. This format revision will affect the ``Identification of Plan'' sections of 40 CFR part 52, by adding a table for the Chattanooga portion of the Tennessee SIP. This revision will also affect the format of the SIP materials that will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Federal Register (OFR), the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, and the Regional Office.

The EPA is approving revisions to the South Carolina and Georgia State Implementation Plans (SIPs), submitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) and the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD), respectively, for the Early Action Compact (EAC) areas in South Carolina and Georgia. The proposed SIP revisions were submitted on December 29, 2004, by South Carolina and December 31, 2004, by Georgia. There are ten EAC areas in South Carolina and Georgia covered by this final action: the Appalachian, Catawba, Pee Dee, Waccamaw, Santee Lynches, Berkeley- Charleston-Dorchester, Low Country, Lower Savannah, Central Midlands, and Upper Savannah EAC Areas. Only the Lower Savannah EAC Area has counties in both South Carolina and Georgia. For the purposes of this document, however, all of the above listed EAC areas will be collectively referred to as the ``South Carolina and Georgia EAC Areas.'' The SIP revisions meet the requirements for the South Carolina and Georgia EAC Areas to attain and maintain the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (the 8-hour ozone standard) as described in the EAC Protocol and related regulations. EPA is also now approving the photochemical modeling used by South Carolina and Georgia to support the attainment and maintenance demonstrations of the 8-hour ozone standard in the South Carolina and Georgia EAC Areas. The revisions being approved today further incorporate regulatory control measures into the South Carolina SIP, including two Statewide regulations pertaining to control of nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions and open burning. In addition, this final action also corrects inadvertent errors in the May 26, 2005, proposal document relating to these SIP revisions (70 FR 30396). In today's final action, EPA is not finalizing its proposed rulemaking to defer the effective date of the nonattainment designations for EAC areas. In a separate action, published on June 8, 2005, EPA proposed to defer the effective date of the nonattainment deferred designation for EAC areas until December 31, 2006 (69 FR 23858). EPA final action on the deferral is expected to be published before September 30, 2005.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a continuing Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. This ICR is scheduled to expire on 12/30/05. 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.

EPA is revising the format of part 52 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR part 52) for materials submitted by Knox County that are incorporated by reference (IBR) into the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP). The regulations affected by this format change have all been previously submitted by the local agency and approved by EPA. This format revision will affect the ``Identification of Plan'' sections of 40 CFR part 52, by adding a table for the Knox County portion of the Tennessee SIP. This revision will also affect the format of the SIP materials that will be available for public inspection at the Office of Federal Register (OFR), the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, and the Regional Office.

The EPA is taking direct final action on amendments to the national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for reinforced plastic composites production which were issued April 12, 2003, under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The direct final amendments revise compliance options for open molding, correct errors, and add clarification to sections of the rule. We are issuing the amendments as a direct final rule, without prior proposal, because we view the revisions as noncontroversial and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register notice, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to amend the NESHAP for reinforced plastic composites production if adverse comments are filed.

The EPA is proposing to approve an exemption request from the requirements contained in Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for Northern Maine (specifically, Oxford, Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and portions of Hancock and Waldo Counties). This area, along with the rest of the State of Maine, are part of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) as provided for in section 184(a) of the Act. Section 182(f) in combination with section 184 (relating to ozone transport regions) of the Act requires States in the OTR, such as Maine, to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules for major stationary sources of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and to provide for nonattainment area new source review (NSR) for new sources and modifications that are major for NOX. This exemption request, submitted by the State of Maine on March 24, 2005 with supplemental submittals dated April 19, 2005 and June 28, 2005, is based on a demonstration that NOX emissions in the exemption area are not impacting Maine's nonattainment areas or other nonattainment areas in the OTR during times when elevated ozone levels are monitored in those areas. As such, additional reductions in NOX emissions from this area beyond what the State regulations already provide for are not necessary for future attainment in any of Maine's ozone nonattainment areas or other ozone nonattainment areas in the OTR. Thus, as provided for in section 182(f)(2), additional NOX reductions in these areas would constitute excess reductions that can be waived under the Act. This action is being taken under the CAA.