### 26774 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 8, 2013 / Notices

or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202–566–1744. For additional information about EPA’s public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/ dockets

.

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

Abstract: The USEPA Office of Research and Development is investigating public values for scenarios of change for perennial reaches of the effluent-dominated Santa Cruz River, Arizona. These values will be estimated via a willingness to pay mail surveyinstrument. There are two effluentdominated perennial reaches considered in the survey. A ‘‘South’’ reach starts at an outfall in Rio Rico, AZ, and flows northward through Tumaca  ́ cori National Historical Park. A ‘‘North’’ reach is fed by two outfalls in northwest Tucson, Arizona, flows northwest through Marana, AZ. For each of the South and North reaches, two different scenarios of change are considered. The first is a reduction in flow length, and associated decreases in cottonwood-willow riparian forest, a rare forest type in the region. The second is an increase in water quality to allow full contact recreation, such as submersion, at normal flow levels. The baseline flow length and forest acreages, as well as the acreages of forest that would be associated with reduced flow lengths, are derived from natural science research. For the survey, a choice experiment framework is used with statistically designed tradeoff questions. Options to maintain flow length and forest, or increase effluent water quality, are posed as increases in a yearly household tax. Each choice question allows a zero cost ‘‘opt out’’ option. The choice experiment is designed to allow isolation of the public value of each marginal change for each reach. A few additional questions to further understand respondent choicemotivations, as well as their riverrelated recreation behavior, are also included. Several pages of background introduce the issue to respondents. A small number of sociodemographic questions are included to gauge how well the sample respondents represent the target population. Samples of the two major metropolitan areas in southern Arizona, Phoenix and Tucson, will receive the survey. The primary reason for the survey is public value research. The Santa Cruz River is a case study of a waterway highly impacted by human modifications. However it still represents potentially valuable ecological commodities such as rare riparian habitat and recreational opportunities for the regional population. The survey results may also be informative to local decision-makers considering Santa Cruz River management options. Water scarcity in the region raises periodic debates on the best uses of effluent. All survey responses will be kept confidential.

Form Numbers: None. Respondents/affected entities: The target respondents for this survey are representatives 18 yrs or older of households in the two most populated urban areas of Arizona, the Phoenix metro area, and the Tucson metro area. A sample of household representatives 18 yrs or older in each metro area will be contacted by mail following multiple contact protocol in Dillman (2009). A response rate of 30% will be targeted. To increase response rates from the sample, several contacts will be used, including a prenotice to all recipients, a reminder postcard, and followup mailing as needed.

Respondent’s obligation to respond: Voluntary.

Estimated number of respondents: The target responses from the Phoenix and Tucson metro areas is 250 households each, or 500 households total.

Frequency of response: One-time

response.

Total estimated burden: For a typical respondent, a conservative estimate of their time to review and respond to survey questions is 30 minutes. Assuming the target of 500 people total respond to the survey, the burden is 250 hours.

Total estimated cost: The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports average wage rates for some metropolitan areas, with the most recent data being May 2011 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2011). The average hourly wage for all occupations in the Phoenix metro area was $21.61, or an average cost per participant of $10.81. The average hourly wage for all occupations in the Tucson metro area was $20.55, or an average cost per participant of $10.28. Assuming 250 participants in each metro area fill out the survey, the total estimated respondent labor cost is $5,270. This would be a one-time expenditure of their time.

Changes in Estimates: This is the first notice, there is no change in estimates at this time.

Dated: April 19, 2013.
Thomas Fontaine III, Western Ecology Division Director.

[FR Doc. 2013–10932 Filed 5–7–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–HQ–OECA–2012–0658; FRL–9530–9]**

**Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for**  **Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS/NESHAP for Wool**  **Fiberglass Insulation Manufacturing Plants (Renewal)** 

**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, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA–HQ– OECA–2012–0658, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to: docket.oeca@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information


### 26775 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 8, 2013 / Notices

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, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–4113; fax number: (202) 564–0050; email 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 October 17, 2012 (77 FR 63813), 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 both 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–2012–0658, which is available for either public viewing online at http://www.regulations.gov, or 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 either 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, Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.

Title: NSPS/NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Insulation Manufacturing Plants (Renewal).

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1160.12, OMB Control Number 2060–

0114.

ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2013. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NSPS/NESHAP at 40 CFR part 60, subpart A and part 63, subpart A, and any changes, or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart PPP and part 63, subpart NNN.

Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit an initial notification report, performance tests, and periodic reports and results. 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. Reports are required annually at a minimum.

Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 61 Frequency of Response: Occasionally and semiannually

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
18,559

Estimated Total Annual Cost: $2,285,560, which includes $1,797,060 in labor costs, no capital/startup costs, and $488,500 in operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours in this ICR compared to the pervious ICR. This is due to two considerations: (1) The regulations have not changed over the past three years; and (2) the growth rate for the industry is very low, negative or non-existent, so there is no significant change in the overall burden. However, there is an adjustment increase in the total estimated labor costs. The change in cost estimates occurred because the labor rates have increased since the last ICR. This ICR used the most recent labor rates in calculating all burden costs.

Additionally, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information has increased from 103 hours per response to 145 hours per response (41 hours per response for 40 CFR part 60, subpart PPP, and 249 hours per response for 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNN). This is due to a correction in the total number of annual responses. The total number of annual responses decreased from 180 to 128. To calculate the number of responses, the previous ICR assumed that all 29 sources subject to subpart NNN were required to submit Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM) reports semiannually. This method was inconsistent with the burden calculations for Tables 1a and 1b, which assumed only 10% of all sources submit such reports. This ICR corrected the number of sources for submitting SSM reports, which results in a decrease in the number of responses for subpart

NNN.

John Moses, Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 2013–10885 Filed 5–7–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0073; FRL–9530–6]**

**Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and**  **Approval; Comment Request; Distribution of Offsite Consequence**  **Analysis Information Under the Clean Air Act (CAA) (Renewal)** 

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

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), Distribution of Offsite Consequence Analysis Information under Section 112(r)(7)(H) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (Renewal) (EPA ICR No. 1981.05, OMB Control No. 2050–0172) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq. ). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through June 30, 2013. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (78 FR 2992) on January 15, 2013 during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. 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.

**DATES :**  Additional comments may be submitted on or before June 7, 2013.