### 24944 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Notices

Management stating that the 2002 and 2009 MVEBs for the Indianapolis, Indiana area, which were submitted with the state’s PM 2.5 attainment demonstration, are adequate. Receipt of these MVEBs was announced on EPA’s transportation conformity website with a 30 day public comment period, and no comments were submitted. The finding is available at EPA’s conformity Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm. The adequate 2002 and 2009 MVEBs, in tons per year (tpy), for PM2.5 and NO X for the Indianapolis, Indiana area are as follows:



### I NDIANAPOLIS 

### , I NDIANA

PM 2.5 (tpy) NOX (tpy)

2002 ................................................ 842.37 ..................................................................... ... 47,815.51 2009 ................................................ 518.43 ..................................................................... ... 28,537.23

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA’s conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do conform. Conformity to a State Implementation Plan (SIP) means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.

The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for transportation conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, preamble starting at 69 FR 40038, and we used the information in these resources while making our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA’s completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

The finding and the response to comments are available at EPA’s transportation conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671 q. Dated: April 26, 2010. Margaret Guerriero, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 2010–10693 Filed 5–5–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0730; FRL–9146–1]**

**Adequacy Status of the Milwaukee Racine, Door County, Manitowoc**  **County, and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin Areas Submitted 8-Hour**  **Ozone Redesignation and Maintenance Plans for Transportation Conformity**  **Purposes**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of adequacy.

**SUMMARY :**  In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the Milwaukee-Racine area, Door County, Manitowoc County, and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin ozone nonattainment areas are adequate for use in transportation conformity determinations. Wisconsin submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Milwaukee-Racine area, Door County, Manitowoc County, and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin on September 11, 2009. As a result of our finding, these Wisconsin areas must use the MVEBs from the submitted ozone maintenance plan for future transportation conformity determinations.

**DATES :**  This finding is effective May 21,

2010.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Michael Leslie, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section (AR–18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, leslie.michael@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, whenever

‘‘we’’

, ‘‘us ’’ or ‘‘ our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Background

Today’s notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have already made. On April 7, 2010, EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources stating that the 2012 and 2020 MVEBs for the Milwaukee-Racine area, Door County, Manitowoc County, and Sheboygan County, Wisconsin 8-hour ozone areas are adequate. Receipt of these MVEBs was announced on EPA’s transportation conformity Web site, and no comments were submitted. The finding is available at EPA’s conformity Web site: http:// www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/adequacy.htm.

The adequate 2012 and 2020 MVEBs, in tons per day (tpd), for VOCs and NOx for the Wisconsin areas are as follows:

Area 2012 2020

NOx (tpd) VOCs (tpd) NOx (tpd) VOCs (tpd)

Milwaukee-Racine ............................................................................................ 47.27 22.66 20.41 1 4.91 Door County ..................................................................................................... 1.55 0.78 0.74 0.53 Manitowoc County ........................................................................................... 3.76 1.76 1.86 1.25 Sheboygan County .......................................................................................... 4.15 2.01 1.79 1.32

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA’s conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes


### 24945 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Notices

the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do conform. Conformity to a State Implementation Plan (SIP) means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.

The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, preamble starting at 69 FR 40038, and we used the information in these resources while making our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA’s completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

The finding and the response to comments are available at EPA’s transportation conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671 q.
Dated: April 26, 2010. Margaret Guerriero, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 2010–10684 Filed 5–5–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–0395; FRL–9145–2]**

**Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for**  **Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Mineral Wool**  **Production (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 1799.05, OMB Control Number** 
**2060–0362**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  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. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the nature of the collection and the estimated burden and

cost. **DATES :**  Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 7, 2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA–HQ– OECA–2009–0395 to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to docket.oeca@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Learia Williams, Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2223A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–4113; fax number: (202) 564–0050; e-mail address: williams.learia@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On July 8, 2009 (74 FR 32581), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice.

EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID number EPA–HQ–OECA–2009–0395, which is available for public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov, in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202) 566–1752.

Use EPA’s electronic docket and comment system at http:// www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select ‘‘ docket search, ’’ then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA’s policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper will be made available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.

Title: NESHAP for Mineral Wool Production (Renewal).

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1799.05, OMB Control Number 2060–

0362.

ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2010. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. 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 in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mineral Wool Production (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDD) were proposed on May 8, 1997, and promulgated on June 1, 1999. Owners/ operators of mineral wool production plants are required to install fabric filter bag leak detection systems and then initiate corrective action procedures in the event of an operating problem. Owners/operators subject to NESHAP subpart DDD must also continuously monitor and record: (1) The operating temperature of each thermal incinerator; (2) cupola production (melt) rate; and (3) for each curing oven, the formaldehyde content of each binder formulation used to manufacture bonded products.

Owners/operators of affected mineral wool production facility must submit initial notifications (where applicable), performance test and periodic reports. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Semiannual reports are also required. These notifications, reports,