Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 18 / Friday, January 27, 2012 / Notices 4299 

1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the 

submission of the ICR to OMB and the 

opportunity to submit additional 

comments to OMB. If you have any 

questions about this ICR or the approval 

process, please contact the technical 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Dated: January 19, 2012. 

Rona Birnbaum, 

Acting Director, Climate Change Division. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1821 Filed 1–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9623–7] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Valuing Improved 

Water Quality in the Chesapeake Bay 

Using Stated Preference Methods; EPA 

ICR No. 2456.01 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document 

announces that EPA is planning to 

submit a request for a new Information 

Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). Before 

submitting the ICR to OMB for review 

and approval, EPA is soliciting 

comments on specific aspects of the 

proposed information collection as 

described below. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before March 27, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OA–2012–0033 by one of the following 

methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: oei.docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Office of Environmental 

Information, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OA–2012– 

0033. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Nathalie Simon, National Center for 

Environmental Economics, Office of 

Policy, (1809T), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number: (202) 566–2347; fax 

number: (202) 566–2363; email address: 

simon.nathalie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

How can I access the docket and/or 

submit comments? 

EPA has established a public docket 

for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OA–2012–0033, which is available 

for online viewing at 

www.regulations.gov, or in person 

viewing at the Office of Environmental 

Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 

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 OEI Docket is (202) 566– 

1752. 

Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a 

copy of the draft collection of 

information, submit or view public 

comments, access the index listing of 

the contents of the docket, and to access 

those documents in the public docket 

that are available electronically. Once in 

the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in 

the docket ID number identified in this 

document. 

What information is EPA particularly 

interested in? 

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of 

the PRA, EPA specifically solicits 

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. In 

particular, EPA is requesting comments 

from very small businesses (those that 

employ less than 25) on examples of 

specific additional efforts that EPA 

could make to reduce the paperwork 

burden for very small businesses 

affected by this collection. 

What should I consider when I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

You may find the following 

suggestions helpful for preparing your 

comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible and provide specific examples. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you 

used. 

3. Provide copies of any technical 

information and/or data you used that 

support your views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or 

costs, explain how you arrived at the 

estimate that you provide. 

5. Offer alternative ways to improve 

the collection activity. 

6. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the deadline identified 

under DATES. 

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, 

be sure to identify the docket ID number 

assigned to this action in the subject 

line on the first page of your response. 

You may also provide the name, date, 

and Federal Register citation. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
4300 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 18 / Friday, January 27, 2012 / Notices 

What information collection activity or 

ICR does this apply to? 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OA–2012– 

0033. 

Affected entities: Entities potentially 

affected by this action are members of 

the general public who may be 

contacted to participate in the study. 

Title: Willingness to Pay for Improved 

Water Quality in the Chesapeake Bay. 

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2456.01, 

OMB Control No. 2012–new. 

ICR status: This ICR is for a new 

information collection activity. 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, are 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: On May 12, 2009 the 

President signed Executive Order 13508 

calling for the protection and restoration 

of the Chesapeake Bay. In response to 

the Executive Order and other 

considerations the Environmental 

Protection Agency established Total 

Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) of 

nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for 

the Chesapeake Bay. These TMDLs 

called for reductions of 25, 24, and 20%, 

respectively, of these pollutants (EPA 

2011). 

The Chesapeake Bay watershed 

encompasses 64,000 square miles in 

parts of six states and the District of 

Columbia. While efforts have been 

underway to restore the Bay for more 

than 25 years, and significant progress 

has been made over that period, the 

TMDLs are necessary to continue 

progress toward the goal of a healthy 

Bay. As might be expected, a program 

on this scale is likely to be expensive. 

A 2004 report on implementation of the 

‘‘tributary strategies’’ proposed under an 

earlier plan for Bay restoration 

estimated their cost at $28 billion in 

capital costs plus an additional $2.7 

billion dollars per year in perpetuity for 

operating and maintenance costs (Blue 

Ribbon Panel 2004). The watershed 

states of New York, Pennsylvania, 

Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia, and 

Maryland, as well as the District of 

Columbia, have developed Watershed 

Implementation Plans (WIPs) detailing 

the steps each will take to meet its 

obligations under the TMDLs. EPA has 

begun a new study to estimate costs of 

compliance with the TMDLs. While 

these costs may prove high, a multitude 

of benefits may also be anticipated to 

arise from restoring the Chesapeake Bay. 

It is important to put cost estimates in 

perspective by estimating corresponding 

benefits. 

EPA’s National Center for 

Environmental Economics (NCEE) is 

undertaking a benefits analysis of 

improvements in Bay water quality 

under the TMDLs, as well as of ancillary 

benefits that might arise from terrestrial 

measures taken to improve water 

quality. As part of this analysis, NCEE 

plans to conduct a broad-based inquiry 

into benefits using a state-of-the-art 

stated preference survey. Benefits from 

the TMDLs for the Chesapeake will 

accrue to those who live on or near the 

Bay and its tributaries, as well as to 

those who live further away and may 

never visit the Bay but have a general 

concern for the environment. The latter 

category of benefits is typically called 

‘‘non-use values’’ and estimating the 

monetary value can only be achieved 

through a stated preference survey. 

In addition, a stated preference survey 

is able to estimate ‘‘use values,’’ those 

benefits that accrue to individuals who 

choose to live on or near the Bay or 

recreate in the watershed. Stated 

preference surveys allow the analyst to 

define a specific object of choice or suite 

of choices such that benefits are defined 

in as precise a manner as feasible. While 

use benefits of water quality 

improvements in the Chesapeake Bay 

watershed will also be estimated 

through other revealed preference 

methods, the stated preference survey 

allows for careful specification of the 

choice scenarios and will complement 

estimates found using other methods. 

Participation in the survey will be 

voluntary and the identity of the 

participants will be kept confidential. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 0.5 hours per 

response. Burden means the total time, 

effort, or financial resources expended 

by persons to generate, maintain, retain, 

or disclose or provide information to or 

for a Federal agency. This includes the 

time needed to review instructions; 

develop, acquire, install, and utilize 

technology and systems for the purposes 

of collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements which have subsequently 

changed; train personnel to be able to 

respond to a collection of information; 

search data sources; complete and 

review the collection of information; 

and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. 

The ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of the Agency’s estimate, 

which is only briefly summarized here: 

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 1,500. 

Frequency of response: once. 

Estimated total average number of 

responses for each respondent: 1. 

Estimated total annual burden hours: 

750 hours. 

Estimated total annual costs: $15,975. 

This includes estimated respondent 

burden costs only as there are no capital 

costs or operating and maintenance 

costs associated with this collection of 

information. 

What is the next step in the process for 

this ICR? 

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 pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue 

another Federal Register notice 

pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to 

announce the submission of the ICR to 

OMB and the opportunity to submit 

additional comments to OMB. If you 

have any questions about this ICR or the 

approval process, please contact the 

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Dated: January 18, 2012. 

Al McGartland, 

Office Director, National Center for 

Environmental Economics. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1809 Filed 1–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0542; FRL–9608–8] 

Notice of Data Availability Concerning 

Renewable Fuels Produced From Palm 

Oil Under the RFS Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of data availability 

(NODA). 

SUMMARY: This Notice provides an 

opportunity to comment on EPA’s 

analyses of palm oil used as a feedstock 

to produce biodiesel and renewable 

diesel under the Renewable Fuel 

Standard (RFS) program. EPA’s analysis 

of the two types of biofuel shows that 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES