Environmental Protection Agency August 2008 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

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 June 23, 2008 through July 18, 2008, consists of the PMNs and TMEs, both 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.

EPA expressed environmental concerns because the Draft EIS does not identify a specific product delivery/customer use scenario for the new preferred alternative, discuss how the environmental impacts of future coal delivery/customer use scenarios will be analyzed, or describe greenhouse gas emissions from the proposed project. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080154, ERP No. D-FHW-D40342-MD, U.S. 50 Crossing Study, Transportation Improvement from MD 611 to MD 378; and 3rd Street to Somerset Street, Funding, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, Worcester County, MD. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about dredging and impacts to bird habitat. Rating EC1. EIS No. 20080162, ERP No. D-FRC-D03016-MD, Sparrows Point Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Import Terminal Expansion and Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, Construction and Operation, Application Authorization, U.S. COE section 10 and 404 Permits, Baltimore County, MD. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential impacts associated with the proposed terminal. In particular, EPA expressed concerns about the potential water quality impacts associated with the proposed dredging for the terminal and noted that the Draft EIS did not contain sufficient information to fully assess the project's impacts. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080165, ERP No. D-FHW-L59003-00, Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing Project, Bridge, Transit, and Highway Improvements, from State Route 500 in Vancouver, WA to Columbia Boulevard in Portland, OR, Funding, U.S. COE section 10 & 404 Permits, NPDES Permit. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential impacts to the Troutdale Sole Source Aquifer, environmental justice, and aquatic resources impacts, and requested additional analysis for project related air quality impacts be included in the FEIS. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080203, ERP No. D-UCG-A99225-00, Dry Cargo Residue (DCR) Discharges in the Great Lakes, To Regulate Nonhazardous and Nontoxic DRC Sweeping from Vessels in the Great Lakes that Fall under the Jurisdiction of the United States. Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action. Rating LO. EIS No. 20080222, ERP No. D-COE-E39074-FL, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Project, Propose to Construct and Operate Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) on Compartment B and C of the Everglades Agriculture Area, U.S. Army COE section 404 Permit, Palm Beach and Hendry Counties, FL. Summary: EPA is fully supportive of the construction of the proposed Stormwater Treatment Areas (STA). However, EPA expressed environmental concerns about the wetland impacts of the total STA footprints, the discharge of STA waters, and some of the assumptions and technical analyses, and requested that the Final EIS provide additional information and analyses. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080228, ERP No. D-AFS-L65555-WA, Republic Ranger Station Excess Residence Sale Project, Proposes to Sell a 0.72 Acre Parcel of Land with a Residential Building, Republic Ranger District, Colville National Forest, Ferry County, WA. Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action. Rating LO. EIS No. 20080169, ERP No. DR-COE-K39099-CA, Berth 97-109 (China Shipping) Container Terminal Project, Construction and Operation, Issuance of Section 404 (CWA) and Section 10 Rivers and Harbor Act Permits, Port of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to air quality, environmental justice communities, and aquatic and biological resources. EPA recommended commitments to meet and exceed San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan air emission requirements, coordination with the environmental justice community to identify additional measures to offset health impacts, avoidance of fill, and development of a port-wide marine mammal vessel strike reduction program. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080210, ERP No. DS-FHW-F40415-IN, U.S. 31 Improvement Project (I-465 to IN 38), between I-465 North Leg and IN-38, Updated Information, NPDES Permit and U.S. Army section 10 and 404 Permits, Hamilton County, IN. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to water quality, public drinking water supplies, and streams. Rating EC2.

EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. This SIP revision pertains to the requirements in meeting the reasonably available control technology (RACT) under the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). These requirements are based on: Certification that previously adopted RACT controls in Virginia's SIP that were approved by EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are based on the currently available technically and economically feasible controls, and that they continue to represent RACT for the 8-hour implementation purposes; a negative declaration demonstrating that no facilities exist in Stafford County for the applicable control technology guideline (CTG) categories; and new RACT determinations. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EPA is taking direct final action approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado on August 1, 2007. This revision establishes affirmative defense provisions for source owners and operators for excess emissions during periods of malfunction. The affirmative defense provisions are contained in the State of Colorado's Common Provisions regulation. The intended effect of this action is to approve only those portions of Colorado's Common Provisions regulation submitted on August 1, 2007 that relate to the affirmative defense for malfunctions. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

This document announces the EPA Administrator's decision, responding to a petition submitted by the office of James P. Molinaro, President of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, requesting that EPA object to an operating permit issued by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) to the New York Power Authority's Pouch Terminal plant. The petition, requesting an objection to the issuance of the Pouch Terminal title V permit is denied. Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (Act), Petitioner may seek judicial review of any portions of the petition which EPA denied, in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit. Any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date this notice appears in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 307 of the Act.

This regulation establishes time-limited tolerances for residues of difenoconazole, 1-[2-[2-chloro-4-(4-chlorophenoxy)phenyl]- 4-methyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole in or on almond, almond hulls, cantaloupe, cucumber, and watermelon. This action is in response to EPA's granting crisis exemptions to the California Environmental Protection Agency and the Georgia Department of Agriculture under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing use of the pesticide on almond, almond hulls, cantaloupe, cucumber, and watermelon. This regulation establishes a maximum permissible level for residues of difenoconazole in these food commodities. The time-limited tolerances expire and are revoked on December 31, 2011.

EPA has authorized a subcontractor, of its prime contractor Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) of Chantilly, VA, to access information which has been submitted to EPA under all sections 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 availability of EPA's proposed registration review decisions for the pesticides cases Chitin/Chitosan and Farnesol/Nerolidol and opens a public comment period on the proposed registration review decisions. Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory standard for registration, that is, that the pesticide can perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.

EPA is publishing a revised list of pesticide registration service fees applicable to specified pesticide applications and tolerance actions. Under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act, the registration service fees for covered pesticide registration applications received on or after October 1, 2008, increase by 5% rounding up to the nearest dollar from the fees published for fiscal year 2008, and certain decision review periods have been reduced. The new fees and decision review periods become effective on October 1, 2008.

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 October 31, 2008. 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.

The Environmental Protection Agency Region IX is making a tentative determination to approve a research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) project at the Salt River Landfill, a commercial municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) owned and operated by the Salt River Pima-Maricopa County Indian Community (SRPMIC) on the SRPMIC reservation in Arizona. EPA is seeking public comment on EPA's tentative determination to approve SRPMIC's RD&D project. Pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), EPA is also seeking public comment on EPA's proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE), the proposed finding that the Arizona Canal is the sole historic property within the APE, and the proposed finding that the RD&D project will not adversely affect the Arizona Canal.

The EPA is proposing to correct its June 12, 2006, approval of a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone in which it approved Indiana's exclusion of ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (EGBE), a hazardous air pollutant (HAP), as a revision to the SIP. As discussed further below, this proposed action is based upon the fact that HAPs are regulated under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (Act). State programs related to HAPs are governed by Section 112(l) of the Act and should not be included in the SIP under Section 110, which addresses national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants. Therefore, pursuant to section 110(k)(6) of the Act, which allows EPA to correct SIP actions made in error, EPA is proposing to rescind its exclusion of EGBE from Indiana's ozone SIP. It should be noted that EPA delisted EGBE as a HAP on November 29, 2004.

Mississippi has applied to EPA for Final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA proposes to grant final authorization to Mississippi. In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register, EPA is authorizing the changes by an immediate final rule. EPA did not make a proposal prior to the immediate final rule because we believe this action is not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. We have explained the reasons for this authorization in the preamble of the immediate final rule. Unless we get written comments which oppose this authorization during the comment period, the immediate final rule will become effective on the date it establishes, and we will not take further action on this proposal. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will withdraw the immediate final rule and it will not take effect. We will respond to public comments in a later final rule based on this proposal. You may not have another opportunity for comment.

EPA is approving a request submitted by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) on May 22, 2008, to revise the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP). The submission revises the Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) by amending and updating the definition of ``References to the Code of Federal Regulations,'' to refer to the 2007 edition.

On February 13, 2008, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to request redesignation of the El Paso carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area to attainment for the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This submittal also included a CO maintenance plan for the El Paso area and associated Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs). The maintenance plan was developed to ensure continued attainment of the CO NAAQS for a period of at least 10 years from the effective date of EPA approval of redesignation to attainment. In this action, EPA is approving the El Paso CO redesignation request and the maintenance plan with its associated MVEBs as satisfying the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1990.

EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. The state is incorporating revisions EPA made to its definition of volatile organic compound (VOC). This SIP revision adds one compound to the list of compounds that are exempt from being considered a VOC. This is because it was determined that the listed compound does not contribute to ozone formation.

EPA is providing the status of inert ingredient tolerance exemptions revoked in the Federal Register on August 9, 2006 (71 FR 45415) because of insufficient data.

The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') announces and requests comment on its Interim Approach to Applying the Audit Policy to New Owners (``Interim Approach''). (EPA's April 11, 2000 policy on ``Incentives for Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosure, Correction and Prevention of Violations,'' is commonly referred to as the ``Audit Policy'' (65 FR 19618).) This Interim Approach offers a detailed description of how EPA will apply its Audit Policy to new owners of regulated facilities. Under the Interim Approach, EPA will offer certain incentives specifically tailored to new owners that want to make a ``clean start'' at their newly acquired facilities by addressing environmental noncompliance that began prior to acquisition. This Interim Approach is designed to motivate new owners to audit newly acquired facilities and use the Audit Policy to disclose, correct, and prevent the recurrence of violations. It is also designed to encourage self-disclosures of violations that will, once corrected, yield significant pollutant reductions and benefits to the environment. The incentives tailored for new owners include penalty mitigation beyond what is provided in the Audit Policy, as well as the modification of certain Audit Policy conditions. Through applying a clear, transparent, and easily administered Interim Approach to resolving disclosures from new owners, the Agency seeks to use the Audit Policy to leverage its ability to make effective use of scarce government resources. If procedural and transaction costs can be minimized for regulators and self-disclosing new owners, EPA anticipates that the opportunity to work with new owners as they make clean starts at their new facilities can help secure higher quality environmental improvements more quickly and effectively than might otherwise occur. On May 14, 2007, EPA published a Federal Register Notice entitled ``Enhancing Environmental Outcomes From Audit Policy Disclosures Through Tailored Incentives for New Owners'' (72 FR 27116) (``First Notice'') seeking public comment on whether and to what extent the Agency should consider offering tailored incentives to encourage new owners of regulated entities to discover, disclose, correct, and prevent the recurrence of environmental violations pursuant to the Audit Policy. The Agency received public comment supportive of the idea of offering tailored incentives to new owners, and decided to develop an approach to applying the Audit Policy to new owners. The Agency believes the most efficient way to effectively test this strategy, and learn from practical experience, is to implement it on an interim basis. Accordingly, the Agency has decided to begin applying the Interim Approach, effective upon publication of this Notice. EPA is concurrently seeking public comment on the Interim Approach for a period of 90 days. EPA will be reviewing public comment as it is received and will continue its dialogue with stakeholders on whether refinements to the Interim Approach are needed. In addition, the Agency will place into the public docket copies of agreements resolving violations disclosed by new owners under the Interim Approach. In any event, EPA intends to assess the effectiveness of the Interim Approach on a continual basis. Based on public comment and after the Agency has gained sufficient experience in implementing the Interim Approach, EPA will decide to finalize, revise or discontinue these tailored incentives for new owners.

The EPA is approving revisions to Idaho's State Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to open burning and crop residue disposal requirements and visible emissions. The Director of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) submitted a draft SIP revision to the EPA on April 15, 2008. The EPA proposed to approve this draft SIP revision on April 29, 2008, and stated that, if adopted by the State substantially unchanged from its current form, it would satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air Act (hereinafter the Act or CAA). 73 FR 23155. The Director of the IDEQ submitted a final SIP revision to the EPA on May 28, 2008. Based on EPA's review of this final SIP revision, EPA's analysis and review of the 2008 draft SIP revision (73 FR 23155), and comments received by the EPA during the public comment period on EPA's proposed approval of the draft SIP revision, the EPA is approving the final SIP revision submitted by the IDEQ on May 28, 2008, because it satisfies the requirements of the CAA. The Director of the IDEQ also submitted a SIP revision relating to open burning and crop residue disposal requirements on May 22, 2003, which the EPA approved on July 11, 2005 (70 FR 39658). In a ruling issued on January 30, 2007, and amended on May 29, 2007, that approval was remanded and vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in Safe Air for Everyone v. USEPA, 475 F.3d 1096, amended 488 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir 2007) (SAFE decision). In the EPA's April 29, 2008, proposal discussed above, the EPA re-proposed to approve the portion of the May 22, 2003, SIP revision that would not be changed by the draft SIP revision, if adopted, submitted on April 15, 2008. We are also finalizing our approval of this portion of the 2003 SIP revision because it satisfies the requirements of the Act and does not contravene the Court's SAFE decision.