Environmental Protection Agency June 2006 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

EPA Region 4 is publishing a direct final notice of deletion of the Davie Landfill, Superfund Site (Site), located in Davie, Florida, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final notice of deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the State of Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) because EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed and, therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to extend the expiration date of the New England University Laboratories XL Project (Labs XL Project) rule that EPA previously promulgated under the eXcellence and Leadership program (Project XL), allowing laboratories at certain universities in Massachusetts and Vermont to follow certain alternative RCRA generator requirements. In this action, EPA proposes to extend the expiration date from September 30, 2006 to April 15, 2009.

EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), in coordination with the EPA regional offices, is soliciting pesticide and special project proposals from eligible tribes, Alaska native villages, and intertribal consortia for fiscal year (FY) 2006 funding. Under this program, cooperative agreement awards will provide financial assistance to eligible tribal governments, Alaska native village governments, or intertribal consortia to carry out projects that assess or reduce risks to human health and the environment from pesticide exposure. The total amount of funding available for award in FY 2006 is expected to be approximately $400,000, with a maximum funding level of $50,000 per project.

The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office is inviting the public to register and attend a public session to provide feedback on the SAB Web site development.

This notice announces the availability of EPA'sTolerance Reassessment Progress and Risk Management Decision (TRED) for the chlorinated triazine pesticide propazine, and opens a public comment period on this document, related risk assessments, and other support documents. EPA has reviewed the low risk pesticide propazine through a modified, streamlined version of the public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide tolerance reassessment and reregistration decisions. Through the tolerance reassessment program, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and food safety standards. The Agency is concurrently issuing for public comment the Triazine Cumulative Risk Assessment; see EPA-HQ- OPP-2005-0481 in the Notices section of this issue of the Federal Register.

This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide petition proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of mefenoxam in or on beans (succulent shelled) and turnip greens.

This notice announces the availability of EPA's cumulative risk assessment for the chlorinated triazine group of pesticides and opens a public comment period on this document and other support documents. As required by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), a cumulative risk assessment, which evaluates exposures based on a common mechanism of toxicity, was conducted to evaluate the risk from food, drinking water, and non-occupational exposure resulting from all registered uses of chlorinated triazine pesticides. The chlorinated triazine group includes the pesticides atrazine, simazine, and propazine, in addition to their three chlorinated degradates. Propazine, however, was not incorporated into the cumulative risk assessment because no dietary, drinking water, or residential human exposure to propazine is anticipated from any of the currently registered uses. The Agency is concurrently issuing for public comment the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for simazine and the Tolerance Reassessment Progress and Risk Management Decision (TRED) for propazine. See EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0151 and EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0496 in the Notices section of this issue of the Federal Register. A memo finalizing the Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision for atrazine is being added to docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0367.

The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public teleconference of the SAB Ecological Processes and Effects Committee.

The EPA published a notice in the Federal Register on Monday, June 12, 2006 (71 FR 33747), announcing a public workshop to be held to elicit public input and discussion on the process the Agency uses to conduct periodic reviews of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), as discussed in a recent report prepared by an Agency workgroup. The report is entitled ``Review of the Process for Setting National Ambient Air Quality Standards.'' This workshop is not intended to cover issues related to the ongoing review of any specific NAAQS. The purpose of today's follow-up notice is to announce the availability of telephone call-in capability and a number to call for those persons who would like to participate but are unable to attend the workshop.

Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), EPA gives notice of a meeting of the Gulf of Mexico Program (GMP) Management Committee (MC). For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Gloria Car, U.S. EPA, at (228) 688-2421 or car.gloria@epa.gov. To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Gloria Car, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

On March 22, 2006, EPA published a direct final rule to approve a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance plan revision for the Lakeview, Oregon nonattainment area and to redesignate the area from nonattattainment to attainment for PM10. PM10 air pollution is suspended particulate matter with a nominal diameter less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers. We stated in the direct final rule that if EPA received adverse comment, we would publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule. We received adverse comment on the direct final rule, and, therefore, in a separate action, are withdrawing our direct final rule. In a parallel notice of proposed rulemaking, also published on March 22, 2006, we stated that if we received adverse comments we would address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. This final action addresses the adverse comments we received and finalizes our approval of the SIP revision and redesignation request for the Lakeview PM10 nonattainment area.

EPA is taking direct final action to approve a PM10 attainment and maintenance plan for the Medford-Ashland, Oregon nonattainment area (Medford-Ashland NAA) and to redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment for PM10. PM10 air pollution is particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers. Also in this action, EPA is approving revisions to Oregon's statewide industrial source rules for new and modified major industrial sources of PM10 and revisions to the area-specific industrial source rules that apply in the Medford-Ashland NAA. EPA is approving the SIP revisions and redesignation request because the State adequately demonstrates that the control measures being implemented in the Medford-Ashland NAA result in attainment and maintenance of the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and all other requirements of the Clean Air Act for redesignation to attainment are met.

EPA is proposing to approve a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) attainment plan and maintenance plan for the Medford-Ashland, Oregon nonattainment area (Medford-Ashland NAA) and to redesignate the area from nonattattainment to attainment for PM10. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Oregon's statewide industrial source rules for new and modified major industrial sources of PM10 and revisions to the area-specific industrial source rules that apply in the Medford-Ashland NAA. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision and redesignation request because the State adequately demonstrates that the control measures being implemented in the Medford-Ashland nonattainment area result in attainment and maintenance of the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and all other requirements of the Clean Air Act for redesignation to attainment are met.

This document announces the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) response to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

EPA is proposing to remove the limited status of its approval of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision that requires all major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) to implement reasonably available control technology (RACT). EPA is proposing to convert its limited approval of Pennsylvania's VOC and NOX RACT regulations to full approval because EPA has approved or is currently conducting rulemaking to approve all of the case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by Pennsylvania for the affected sources. In prior final rules, EPA has previously fully approved Pennsylvania's VOC and NOX RACT regulations for the Philadelphia-Wilmington- Trenton, and Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley areas. EPA is now proposing to convert its limited approval of Pennsylvania's VOC and NOX RACT regulations as they apply in the remainder of the Commonwealth to full approval because EPA has approved or is currently conducting rulemaking to approve all of the case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by Pennsylvania for the affected sources in the remainder of the Commonwealth. Final action converting the limited approval to full approval shall occur once EPA has completed rulemaking to approve either (1) the case-by-case RACT proposals for all sources subject to the RACT requirements currently known in the remainder of the State, outside of the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia areas; or (2) for a sufficient number of sources such that the emissions from any remaining subject sources represent a de minimis level of emissions. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).

EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to riparian resources and air quality, and recommended additional protections for these resources be included in the Final EIS. Rating EC2.

On November 1, 2004, EPA published a proposal that contained several options for the control of cooling water intake structures at existing Phase III facilities and at new offshore oil and gas extraction facilities. This rule establishes categorical section 316(b) requirements for intake structures at new offshore oil and gas extraction facilities that have a design intake flow threshold of greater than 2 million gallons per day and that withdraw at least 25 percent of the water exclusively for cooling purposes. For existing Phase III facilities, EPA determined that uniform national standards are not the most effective way at this time to address cooling water intake structures at these facilities. Instead, EPA believes that it is better to continue to rely upon the existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, which implements section 316(b) for existing facilities not covered under the Phase II rule on a case-by-case, best professional judgment basis. This final action constitutes Phase III of EPA's section 316(b) regulation development. This rule does not alter the regulatory requirements for facilities subject to the Phase I or Phase II regulations.

Under the authority of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, EPA anticipates that approximately $700,000 will be available to support grants to States in Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 for programs to promote the use of successful pollution prevention techniques by businesses and technical assistance providers. This grant program seeks to increase access to pollution prevention information and ensure this information is available to all facilities, businesses, or technical assistance providers. Federal funds must be matched dollar for dollar in this grant program. The maximum cost of an application is $240,000 with $120,000 from Federal funding.

This regulation establishes a temporary exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the microbial pesticide Bacillus mycoides isolate J on sugar beets when applied/used to control Cercospora Leaf Spot (Cercospora beticola) in sugar beets. Montana Microbial Products submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), requesting the temporary exemption from tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Bacillus mycoides isolate J. The temporary tolerance exemption will expire on December 31, 2007.

This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide petitions proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of pendimethalin in or on onion, green; leek; onion, welsh; shallot, fresh leaves; and strawberry.

This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide petitions proposing the establishment of regulations for residues of pendimethalin in or on fruiting vegetable group, pome fruit group, apple pomace, juneberry, stone fruit group, and pomegranate.

This document notifies the public that the Administrator of EPA has forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture a draft final rule as required by section 25(a) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). As described in the Agency's semi-annual Regulatory Agenda, the draft final rule will establish procedures to implement section 3(g) of FIFRA which provides for periodic review of pesticide registrations. The goal of these regulations, which are required by FIFRA section 3(g), is to review a pesticide's registration every 15 years. The regulations will address the following procedural aspects of the program: establishing pesticide cases for registration review; establishing schedules; assembling information to be considered during the review; deciding on the scope and depth of the review; calling in data under FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) that are needed to conduct the review; reviewing data and conducting risk assessments or benefit analyses, as needed; deciding whether a pesticide continues to meet the standard of registration in FIFRA; and public participation in the registration review process. If a pesticide does not meet the FIFRA standard, and cancellation is determined to be needed, the Agency will follow cancellation procedures in section 6 of FIFRA. This program will begin after the completion of tolerance reassessment in 2006 and before the completion of reregistration in 2008. Each pesticide will be reviewed every 15 years to assure that the it continues to meet the FIFRA standard for registration, including compliance with any new legislation, regulations or science policy.

This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of potassium silicate in or on all food commodities when applied/used as a fungicide, insecticide or miticide so long as the potassium silicate is not applied at rates exceeding 1% by weight in aqueous solution and when used in accordance with good agricultural practices. PQ Corporation submitted a petition 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 potassium silicate.

Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, EPA gives notice of a meeting of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board. The Board meets three times each calendar year at different locations along the U.S.-Mexico border and in Washington, DC. It was created by the Enterprise for the Americas Initiative Act of 1992. An Executive Order delegates implementing authority to the Administrator of EPA. The Board is responsible for providing advice to the President and the Congress on environmental and infrastructure issues and needs within the States contiguous to Mexico in order to improve the quality of life of persons residing on the United States side of the border. The statute calls for the Board to have representatives from U.S. Government agencies; the governments of the States of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas; and private organizations with expertise on environmental and infrastructure problems along the southwest border. The purpose of the meeting is to hold a public comment session and also to hear presentations from local experts on the topic of its next report to the President: ``Environmental Protection and Border Security on the U.S. Border with Mexico.'' A copy of the meeting agenda will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/ocem/gneb.