February 2010 Action Initiation List, corrected (as of 3/22/2010) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) The following actions were initiated by EPA this month. Explanations of which EPA actions are included on this list and of each elebe found at the end of this document. The two most recent Action Initiation Lists (AILs) can always be found at: http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/search/ail.html. But, they w

on the actions listed herein. Updates on priority rulemakings are available from EPA's Rulemaking Gateway (www.epa.gov/rulema

rules on this AIL is in the Rulemaking Gateway, a link to the rule's profile is included in the table below. For all rules – those that arthose that are not – you may obtain updates twice a year in EPA’s Semiannual Regulatory Agenda, which is accessible from these 

• EPA’s Laws, Regulations, Guidance and Dockets (http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/search/regagenda.html)

• RegInfo.gov (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain)

• Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=UnifiedAgenda&agency=EPA&pubperiod=200

To assist you in tracking actions’ progress, the RINs in the table below are also displayed in the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda anGateway. 

Action Initiation List – February 2010 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2040-AF20 Revised 

Regulations for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 

NPRM Ashley Toy 

202-564-2296 Toy.Ashley@epa.gov Follow this rule on the

Rulemaking Gateway. 

EPA and authorized states administer the NationDischarge Elimination System (NPDES) program concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs)nationally-applicable rules in 2003 and 2008. On President Barack Obama issued Executive OrdeChesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration. Agsingle largest contributor of nitrogen, phosphorussediment pollution to the Chesapeake Bay Wateris the source of about half of the nutrient loading agriculture. As directed under the Executive Ordedeveloped a strategy, in consultation with the Stastakeholders, for protecting water quality in the CBay. The proposed action might establish broadeauthority in the Bay and additional requirements fmanagement for CAFOs in the bay. Consistent wjoint federal strategy, the scope of the proposed rconsider expanding the universe of CAFOs and rstringent standards for permits (e.g. better nutrienmanagement planning). Additionally, options for a designation process of smaller facilities as CAFOoff-site manure management may be considered nationally. During the rulemaking process, EPA whow effectively Chesapeake Bay states strengthepollution control programs to achieve the reductioand sediment pollution needed to meet Bay watestandards. The Chesapeake Bay CAFO Rule is bdeveloped to ensure Regional and State Water NPermitting Authorities have sufficient tools to reduof manure from these facilities. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2050-AG60 Hazardous Waste 

Management Systems: Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste: Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Injectate in Geological Sequestration Activities 

NPRM Ross Elliot 

703-308-8748 Elliot.Ross@epa.gov Follow this rule on the

Rulemaking Gateway. 

On July 25, 2008, EPA published a proposed rule Safe Drinking Water Act Underground Injection CProgram to create a new class of injection well (Cgeological sequestration (GS) of carbon dioxide (43492. In response to that proposal, EPA receivecomments asking for clarification on how the ResConservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardorequirements apply to CO2 streams. EPA is now proposed rule under RCRA to explore options suconditional exemption from the RCRA requiremehazardous CO2 streams in order to facilitate impGS while protecting human health and the enviro

2060-AQ12 Tier II Light-Duty 

Vehicle and LightDuty Truck Emission Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Standards (Section 610 Review) 

610 Review Tad Wysor 

734-214-4332 Wysor.Tad@epa.gov 

On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA promuregulation to require emission standards for light-and light-duty trucks through lowering tailpipe emstandards. Specifically, EPA sought to reduce emnitrogen oxides and non-methane hydrocarbons, which contribute to ozone pollution. The rulemakprovided limitations on the sulfur content of gasonationwide. Sulfur in gasoline has a detrimental icatalyst performance and could be a limiting factointroduction of advanced technologies on motor vPursuant to Section 610 of the Regulatory FlexibFebruary 19, 2010 EPA initiated a review of this rdetermine if it should be continued without changbe rescinded or amended to minimize adverse ecimpacts on small entities (75 FR 7426). As part oEPA is considering, and has solicited comments following factors: (1) The continued need for the nature of complaints or comments received conc(3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to whoverlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federlocal government rules; and (5) the degree to wheconomic conditions, or other factors have changaffected by the rule. The results of EPA's review summarized in a report and placed in the docket OAR-2010-0052. This docket can be accessed awww.regulations.gov. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2060-AQ15 Minor 

Harmonizing Changes to General Provisions of the GHG Mandatory Reporting Rule 

Direct Final Suzzane Kocchi 

202-343-9434 Kocchi.Suzzane@epa.gov 

This action would make minor harmonizing changgeneral provisions for the greenhouse gas reportCFR part 98, subpart A) to accommodate the addsource categories not included in the 2009 final rincludes subparts proposed in April 2009 but not 2009, and any new subparts that may be proposefuture. The rule would update 40 CFR 98.2(a) on applicability and 40 CFR 98.3 regarding the repoto accommodate any additional subparts and the their reporting obligations (e.g., source categorie2010 would not begin reporting until 2011 and re2012). 

2060-AQ16 2011 Renewable 

Fuel Volume Standards as required by Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) 

NPRM David Korotney 

734-214-4507 Korotney.David@epa.gov 

In response to the Energy Independence and Se(EISA), EPA finalized the RFS2 program regulatiHowever, under EISA, the EPA is required to proregulations that specify the annual statutory volurequirements for renewable fuels, including cellubiomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and totafuel that must be used in transportation fuel in eathe case of the cellulosic biofuel standard, EISA srequires that the standard be set based on the voprojected to be available during the following yeavolumes are lower than those specified under EISmay also lower the advanced biofuel and total restandards each year accordingly. This regulatory establishes these annual statutory volume requircellulosic, biomass-based diesel, advanced biofurenewable fuels that apply to all gasoline and dieor imported in year 2011. This regulation, thus, sstandards for renewable fuels required in year 20potentially affected by this final rule are those invproduction, distribution, and sale of transportation including gasoline and diesel fuel or renewable fuethanol and biodiesel. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2060-AQ17 Regulation to 

Prevent the Misfueling of Vehicles and Engines with Gasoline Containing Greater than Ten Volume Percent Ethanol and Modifications to the Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline 

NPRM Barry Garelick 

202-343-9028 Garelick.Barry@epa.gov 

This rulemaking does two things. First, it will help misfueling of vehicles and engines not certified to gasoline containing greater than 10% ethanol ("Eproposing a rulemaking under the Clean Air Act sto control and regulate distribution of fuels and futhat may pose harm to the environment or public Vehicles or engines not certified or approved for experience increased emissions of criteria pollutaaccelerated deterioration of emission control systhigher oxygen content from increased ethanol levemissions increases will have an adverse effect oand public health due to known relationships betwpollutants and the formation of ground level ozonFurthermore, vehicles or engines operating on Eexperience operability issues leading to tamperinconfigurations designed to satisfy EPA emissions Second, this rulemaking will modify the Reformul(“RFG”) and Anti-dumping programs (40 CFR Paupdate the Complex Model allowing fuel manufaccertify batches of gasoline containing up to 15% (“E15”). These modifications are required for fuel manufacturers to sell E15. This rulemaking is necessary because of the pro"blenderpumps"—fuel pumps that allow consumefuel vehicles to select E10+ blend levels—and thpending waiver decision under the Clean Air Act 211(f)(4) which, if granted, would allow the use owaiver"). Such a waiver and the current expansioblenderpumps create a need for a label to ensure consumers do not fuel their vehicles or engines wunapproved fuels. This rule is urgently needed because of the speeblenderpumps are spreading and the possibility orendering a decision on the E15 waiver as early aof 2010. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2060-AQ20 Residual Risk and 

Technology Review Amendments to the Phosphoric Acid and Phosphate Fertilizer Production NESHAPs 

NPRM Susan Fairchild 

919-541-5167 Fairchild.Susan@epa.gov Follow this rule on the 

Rulemaking Gateway. 

Phosphate rock is the primary raw material for phacid, which in turn is the raw material for phosphaThese 2 actions are grouped together because thproduction processes are usually located at the sPart 63 National Emissions Standards for HazardPollutants for phosphoric acid and phosphate fer(subparts AA and BB, respectively) were promulg1999. Facilities subject to these rules were requircompliance by June 2002. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to address the rito the public (ie., a 'risk review') within 8 years aftpromulgation of the MACT standards. We must atechnology review of the source categories within determine whether new technology exists to reduof hazardous air pollutants (HAP) below the leveby the maximum achievable control technology (standards. For purposes of expediency, these 2 combined together and called a risk and technoloRTR. The amendments will address both risk reduction technology advancement for the phosphoric acid phosphate fertilizer source categories. 

2060-AQ23 Method 16C for 

the Determination of Total Reduced Sulfur Emissions from Stationary Sources 

NPRM Foston Curtis 

919-541-1063 Curtis.Foston@epa.gov 

Method 16C is used to determine total reduced semissions and is being proposed as an alternativ16, 16A, and 16B for regulated facilities in kraft p(Subpart BB of 40 CFR 60) and other industries tthese compounds. Method 16C combines the saoxidation technology of Method 16A with the insttechnology of Method 6C to provide a user-friendprocedure. The Agency has allowed its use in the case-by-case basis and now believes it should be available for general use. This method is not requany rule and does not add any new testing requircurrent regulations. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

RIN Action Title Stage Contact Abstract 

2060-AQ24 Standards of 

Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators; Amendments 

NPRM Ketan Patel 

919-541-9736 Patel.Ketan@epa.gov 

On October 6, 2009, EPA promulgated its responremand of the new source performance standardemissions guidelines for hospital/medical/infectioincinerators by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Columbia Circuit and satisfied the Clean Air Act S129(a)(5) requirement to conduct a review of the every 5 years. This action proposes to amend the performance standards emissions limits for nitrog(NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) promulgated for hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators in ocorrect inadvertent drafting errors we made settinlimits, which did not correspond to our description standard-setting process. 

2070-AJ71 Elemental 

Mercury Used in Barometers, Manometers, Hygrometers, and Psychrometers; Proposed Significant New Use Rule 

NPRM Sue Slotnick 

202-566-0514 Slotnick.Sue@epa.gov 

This proposed Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) require persons to notify EPA at least 90 days becommencing the manufacture, import, or processelemental mercury for use in certain measuring dswitches, sensors, gauges, thermocouples, gymnflooring, novelty items, and sports and recreation Historically, elemental mercury has been used in industrial and consumer products, due to its uniqUse of elemental mercury in products can lead to the environment during manufacturing, recycling, Under certain conditions, mercury in the environmcause adverse effects in humans and wildlife. Sogovernments have restricted mercury use in prodhave requested federal action to bolster these effEPA committed to pursue reductions in mercury switches, relays, and measuring devices. In 2007a SNUR for elemental mercury used in certain swpreviously installed in motor vehicles. Two years EPA issued a second SNUR for elemental mercuflow meters, natural gas manometers, and pyromhas now identified more mercury-containing prodcost-effective substitutes and are no longer manueffect of the rule is to require anyone who intends commence manufacture of the named products t90 days prior to manufacture. 
Action Initiation List – February 2010 

What EPA Actions Appear on the AILs? Generally, AILs include those actions that 1) will appear in upcoming Semiannual Regulatory Agenda and 2) have been approved f

EPA's Regulatory Policy Officer. In rare instances, an action will not appear on an AIL before it appears in the Agenda. Also, keep 

not post immediately. You can access a given month's list roughly 15 days after the close of the month (e.g., the April 2008 AIL will May 15th). 

What Does Each Column in the AIL Mean? RIN RIN stands for "Regulation Identifier Number." A RIN is assigned by the Regulatory Information Service Center, a component of the 

Administration, to identify each regulatory action listed in our Semiannual Regulatory Agenda and Annual Regulatory Plans. Also, R

headings of our rules when they are published in the Federal Register to make it easier for you to track our actions. An example of 

AG37. It is composed of two parts. The first part (i.e., 2050) identifies which office within EPA is in charge of the action. In this caseWaste and Emergency Response. The second part (e.g., AG37) is an alpha-numeric code automatically generated as rules are as

Title Self-explanatory. Stage The stage of an action describes where we are in the rule writing process, from the very beginning when a rule (or other action) is jwhen it is published as a final rule (or other action) in the Federal Register. For example, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR

proposed rule or proposed modification to an existing rule. In the AILs, the following acronyms are used: • ANPRM - Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • Direct Final - Direct Final Action • NPRM - Notice of Proposed Rulemaking • Supplemental - Supplemental NPRM 

Contact Provides the name, phone, and email address for the EPA staff person assigned to this rule. Additionally, if a rule is in EPA's Rule(www.epa.gov/rulemaking/), then a link to the rule's profile will be provided in this column. Abstract A brief summary of the action and its purpose. Projected Publication Date Since many variables affect how long it takes to write a rule or other action, it is difficult to predict a firm publication date when we hon an action. Therefore, we insert one of two options in the "Projected Publication Date" column: 1) "12 months or less" and 2) "mo

These options give you some idea of how quickly we expect to complete an action.