70128 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices 

1The EPA decision was signed on August 13, 

2008 and published at 73 FR 52042 (September 8, 

2008). 

there is no such delegated authority, the 

reports are sent directly to the EPA 

regional office. This information is 

being collected to assure compliance 

with 40 CFR part 60, subparts Ea and 

Eb, as authorized in section 112 and 

114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The 

required information consists of 

emissions data and other information 

that have been determined to be private. 

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 the EPA regulations are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR 

chapter 15, and are identified on the 

form and/or instrument, if applicable. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 198 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. 

Respondents/Affected Entities: 

Municipal waste combustors. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

12. 

Frequency of Response: Initially, 

quarterly, annually, and semiannually. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

20,421. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$1,916,503, which includes $1,757,811 

in labor costs, $60,000 in capital/startup 

costs, and $98,692 in operation and 

maintenance (O&M) costs. 

Changes in the Estimates: There is no 

change in the labor hours or cost in this 

ICR compared to the previous ICR. This 

is due to two considerations: (1) The 

regulations have not changed over the 

past three years and are not anticipated 

to change over the next 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. There is, however, an 

increase in the estimated burden cost as 

currently identified in the OMB 

Inventory of approved Burdens. The 

increase is not due to any program 

changes. The change in burden cost is 

due to the use of the most updated labor 

rates. 

Since there are no changes in the 

regulatory requirements and there is no 

significant industry growth, the labor 

hours from the previous ICR are used in 

this ICR. 

Dated: November 4, 2011. 

John Moses, 

Director, Collection Strategies Division. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29186 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[AMS–FRL–9490–7] 

California State Motor Vehicle 

Pollution Control Standards; 

Amendments to the California HeavyDuty Engine On-Board Diagnostic 

Regulation; Waiver Request; 

Opportunity for Public Hearing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of Opportunity for Public 

Hearing and Comment. 

SUMMARY: The California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) has notified EPA that it 

has adopted amendments to its 

regulations related to heavy-duty engine 

on-board diagnostic (HD OBD) in 

California. By letter dated September 27, 

2010, CARB requested that EPA confirm 

that its amendments are within-thescope of a previous waiver of 

preemption issued by EPA. In the 

alternative, CARB requested that EPA 

confirm that the amendments that relax 

and clarify the existing HD OBD 

regulation are within-the-scope of a 

previous waiver of preemption issued 

by EPA and that EPA grant a new 

waiver of preemption for the remainder 

of CARB’s HD OBD amendments. This 

notice announces that EPA has 

tentatively scheduled a public hearing 

concerning California’s request and that 

EPA is accepting written comment on 

the request. 

DATES: EPA has tentatively scheduled a 

public hearing concerning CARB’s 

request on December 12, 2011 at 10 a.m. 

EPA will hold a hearing only if any 

party notifies EPA by November 25, 

2011, expressing its interest in 

presenting oral testimony. By December 

1, 2011, any person who plans to attend 

the hearing may call David Dickinson at 

(202) 343–9256 to learn if a hearing will 

be held or may check the following Web 

site for an update: http://www.epa.gov/ 

otaq/cafr.htm. 

Parties wishing to present oral 

testimony at the public hearing should 

also provide written notice to David 

Dickinson at the address noted below. If 

EPA receives a request for a public 

hearing, that hearing will be held at 

1310 L St. NW., Washington, DC 20005. 

If EPA does not receive a request for a 

public hearing, then EPA will not hold 

a hearing, and instead consider CARB’s 

request based on written submissions to 

the docket. Any party may submit 

written comments by January 9, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA will make available for 

public inspection materials submitted 

by CARB, written comments received 

from interested parties, and any 

testimony given at the public hearing. 

Materials relevant to this proceeding are 

contained in the Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, 

maintained in Docket No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–0816. The docket is located 

at The Air Docket, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20460, and may be viewed between 

8 a.m., and 5:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday. The telephone is (202) 566– 

1742. A reasonable fee may be charged 

by EPA for copying docket material. 

Additionally, an electronic version of 

the public docket is available through 

the Federal government’s electronic 

public docket and comment system. 

You may access EPA dockets at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. After opening the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site, 

enter EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0816 in 

‘‘Search Documents’’ to view documents 

in the record. Although a part of the 

official docket, the public docket does 

not include Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Dickinson, Compliance Division 

(6405J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: 

(202) 343–9256, Fax: (202) 343–2804, 

email address: 

Dickinson.David@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

(A) Procedural History 

CARB initially adopted the HD OBD 

requirements in December 2005, and 

EPA issued a waiver of preemption in 

August 2008.1 CARB’s HD OBD 

regulation, as initially adopted, required 

manufacturers to install a fully 

compliant HD OBD system on both 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices 70129 

2The California Office of Administrative Law 

approved the amendments and the new regulation 

on May 18, 2010. The HD OBD requirements, as 

adopted in 2005, included detailed certification 

requirements and production engine/vehicle 

evaluation testing. The amended regulations, at 13 

CCR section 1971.5, includes additional in-use 

enforcement provisions. 

3CARB’s request letter can be found at EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–0816–0001. EPA’s previous waiver is at 

73 FR 52042 (September 8, 2008). 

diesel and gasoline powered heavy-duty 

engines (engines used in vehicles 

having a gross vehicle weight rating 

greater than 14,000 pounds). The 

requirements are phased in on a single 

engine family for model years 2010 

through 2012 before requiring 

manufacturers to incorporate fully 

compliant HD OBD systems on all 2013 

and later model year engines. 

CARB adopted amendments to its HD 

OBD regulation along with a new HD 

OBD enforcement regulation on April 5, 

2010.2 In amending the HD OBD 

regulation CARB, among other 

provisions, relaxed the malfunction 

thresholds until 2013 model year for 

three major emission controls: PM 

filters, NOX catalysts, and NOX sensors. 

The amendments also delay certain 

monitoring requirements, including 

those that apply to catalyst-based 

components, until 2013. CARB further 

amended the regulation to expand the 

monitoring requirements for EGR and 

boost control system strategies. 

By letter dated September 27, 2010, 

CARB requested that EPA confirm that 

amendments to its HD OBD regulations 

are within-the-scope of a previous 

waiver of preemption issued by EPA.3

In the alternative, CARB requested that 

EPA confirm that the amendments that 

relax and clarify the existing HD OBD 

regulation (e.g. the major emission 

control monitoring requirements noted 

above) are within-the-scope of EPA’s 

previous HD OBD waiver of preemption. 

Under this alternative request, CARB 

seeks a new waiver of preemption for 

the remainder of CARB’s HD OBD 

amendments. 

(B) Background and Discussion 

Section 209(a) of the Clean Air Act, as 

amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(a), 

provides: 

No state or any political subdivision 

thereof shall adopt or attempt to enforce any 

standard relating to the control of emissions 

from new motor vehicles or new motor 

vehicle engines subject to this part. No state 

shall require certification, inspection or any 

other approval relating to the control of 

emissions from any new motor vehicle or 

new motor vehicle engine as condition 

precedent to the initial retail sale, titling (if 

any), or registration of such motor vehicle, 

motor vehicle engine, or equipment. 

Section 209(b)(1) of the Act requires 

the Administrator, after notice and 

opportunity for public hearing, to waive 

application of the prohibitions of 

section 209(a) for any state that has 

adopted standards (other than crankcase 

emission standards) for the control of 

emissions from new motor vehicles or 

new motor vehicle engines prior to 

March 30, 1966, if the state determines 

that the state standards will be, in the 

aggregate, at least as protective of public 

health and welfare as applicable Federal 

standards. California is the only state 

that is qualified to seek and receive a 

waiver under section 209(b). The 

Administrator must grant a waiver 

unless she finds that (A) the abovedescribed ‘‘protectiveness’’ 

determination of the state is arbitrary 

and capricious, (B) the state does not 

need the state standard to meet 

compelling and extraordinary 

conditions, or (C) the state standards 

and accompanying enforcement 

procedures are not consistent with 

section 202(a) of the Act. EPA has 

previously stated that ‘‘consistency with 

section 202(a)’’ requires that California’s 

standards must be technologically 

feasible within the lead time provided, 

given due consideration of costs, and 

that California and applicable Federal 

test procedures be consistent. 

When EPA receives new waiver 

requests from CARB, EPA traditionally 

publishes a notice of opportunity for 

public hearing and comment and then, 

after the comment period has closed, 

publishes a notice of its decision in the 

Federal Register. In contrast, when EPA 

receives within-the-scope waiver 

requests from CARB, EPA usually 

publishes a notice of its decision in the 

Federal Register and concurrently 

invites public comment if an interested 

party is opposed to EPA’s decision. 

Although CARB has submitted a 

within-the-scope waiver request for its 

HD OBD amendments EPA invites 

comment on the following issues. First, 

should California’s HD OBD 

amendments be considered under the 

within-the-scope criteria or should they 

be considered under the full waiver 

criteria? Second, to the extent that not 

all of the HD OBD amendments should 

be considered under the within-thescope criteria, should the amendments 

identified by CARB (as part of its 

alternative request) be considered under 

the within-the-scope criteria? Third, to 

the extent that HD OBD amendments 

should be considered as a within-thescope request, do such amendments 

meet the criteria for EPA to grant a 

within-the-scope confirmation? 

Specifically, do those amendments: (a) 

Undermine California’s previous 

determination that its standards, in the 

aggregate, are at least as protective of 

pubic health and welfare as comparable 

Federal standards, (b) affect the 

consistency of California’s requirements 

with section 202(a) of the Act, or (c) 

raise new issues affecting EPA’s 

previous waiver determinations? Please 

also provide comments to address the 

full waiver analysis, in the event that 

EPA cannot confirm that CARB’s HD 

OBD amendments are within-the-scope 

of previous waivers. The full waiver 

analysis, which we are requesting 

comment on, includes consideration of 

the following three criteria: Whether (a) 

CARB’s determination that its 

standards, in the aggregate, are at least 

as protective of public health and 

welfare as applicable Federal standards 

is arbitrary and capricious, (b) California 

needs separate standards to meet 

compelling and extraordinary 

conditions, and (c) California’s 

standards and accompanying 

enforcement procedures are consistent 

with section 202(a) of the Act. 

Procedures for Public Participation: In 

recognition that public hearings are 

designed to give interested parties an 

opportunity to participate in this 

proceeding, there are no adverse parties 

as such. Statements by participants will 

not be subject to cross-examination by 

other participants without special 

approval by the presiding officer. The 

presiding officer is authorized to strike 

from the record statements that he or 

she deems irrelevant or repetitious and 

to impose reasonable time limits on the 

duration of the statement of any 

participant. 

If a hearing is held, the Agency will 

make a verbatim record of the 

proceedings. Interested parties may 

arrange with the reporter at the hearing 

to obtain a copy of the transcript at their 

own expense. Regardless of whether a 

pubic hearing is held, EPA will keep the 

record open until January 9, 2012. Upon 

expiration of the comment period, the 

Administrator will render a decision of 

CARB’s request based on the record of 

the public hearing, if any, relevant 

written submissions, and other 

information that she deems pertinent. 

All information will be available for 

inspection at the EPA Air Docket No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0816. 

Persons with comments containing 

proprietary information must 

distinguish such information from other 

comments to the greatest possible extent 

and label it as ‘‘Confidential Business 

Information’’ (CBI). If a person making 

comments wants EPA to base its 

decision in part on a submission labeled 

as CBI, then a non-confidential version 

of the document that summarizes the 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
70130 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices 

key data or information should be 

submitted for the public docket. To 

ensure that proprietary information is 

not inadvertently placed in the docket, 

submissions containing such 

information should be sent directly to 

the contact person listed above and not 

to the public docket. Information 

covered by a claim of confidentiality 

will be disclosed by EPA only to the 

extent allowed and by the procedures 

set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim 

of confidentiality accompanies the 

submission when EPA receives it, EPA 

will make it available to the public 

without further notice to the person 

making comments. 

Dated: November 4, 2011. 

Margo Tsirigotis Oge, 

Director, Office of Transportation and Air 

Quality, Office of Air and Radiation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29168 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–8999–9] 

Environmental Impacts Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–1399 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/. Weekly receipt of 

Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 

10/31/2011 Through 11/04/2011 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 

Notice 

Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act 

requires that EPA make public its 

comments on EISs issued by other 

Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters 

on EIS are available at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ 

eisdata.html. 

EIS No. 20110375, Final EIS, USFS, AK, 

Coconino National Forest Travel 

Management Project, Proposes to 

Designate a System of Road and 

Motorized Travel, Implementation, 

Coconino and Yavapai County, AZ, 

Review Period Ends: 12/12/2011, 

Contact: Mike Dechter (928) 527– 

3416. 

EIS No. 20110376, Final EIS, USFS, AZ, 

Pinaleno Ecosystem Restoration 

Project, Proposed On-the-Ground 

Treatments to Improve Forest Health 

and Improve or Protect Red Squirrel 

Habitat, Coronado National Forest, 

Graham County, AZ, Review Period 

Ends: 12/12/2011, Contact: Craig 

Wilcox (928) 348–1961. 

EIS No. 20110377, Final EIS, NOAA, 00, 

Reef Fish Amendment 32, Gag— 

Rebuilding Plan, Annual Catch 

Limits, Management Measures, Red 

Grouper—Annual Catch Limits, 

Management Measures, Grouper 

Accountability Measures, Gulf of 

Mexico, Review Period Ends: 12/12/ 

2011, Contact: Roy E. Crabtree (727) 

824–5301. 

EIS No. 20110378, Draft EIS, FHWA, LA, 

Tier 1—Baton Rouge Loop Toll 

Facility Project, Proposed as a 90 to 

105 mile long Circumferential 

Controlled Access Free-Flow Toll 

Roadway with two new Mississippi 

River Crossings, in Parishes of 

Ascension, East Baton Rouge, 

Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton 

Rouge, LA, Comment Period Ends: 

01/09/2012, Contact: Cark N, 

Highsmith (225) 757–7615. 

EIS No. 20110379, Draft EIS, USN, HI, 

Basing of MV–22 and H–1 Aircraft in 

Support of III Marine Expeditionary 

Force (MEF) Elements, Construction 

and Renovation of Facilities to 

Accommodate and Maintain the 

Squadrons, HI, Comment Period Ends: 

12/27/2011, Contact: John Bigay (808) 

472–1196. 

EIS No. 20110380, Second Draft 

Supplement, NRC, TN, Related to the 

Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant 

Units 2, New and Updated 

Information, Operating License, Rhea 

County, TN, Comment Period Ends: 

01/24/2012, Contact: Justin Poole 

(301) 415–2048. 

EIS No. 20110381, Draft EIS, WAPA, 

AZ, Quartzsite Solar Energy Project 

and Proposed Yuma Field Office 

Resource Management Plan 

Amendment, Implementation, Rightof-Way Application to the BLM, La 

Paz County, AZ, Comment Period 

Ends: 02/08/2012, Contact: Liana 

Reilly (720) 962–7253. 

EIS No. 20110382, Draft EIS, DOI, 00, 

Programmatic EIS—Outer Continental 

Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program— 

2012–2017 in Six Planning Area, 

Western, Central and Eastern Gulf of 

Mexico, Cook Inlet, the Beaufort Sea, 

and the Chukchi Sea, Comment 

Period Ends: 01/09/2012, Contact: 

James F. Bennett (703) 787–1660. 

Amended Notices 

EIS No. 20110332, Draft Supplement, 

USFS, MT, Montanore Project, 

Additional Information on 

Alternatives, Proposes to Construct a 

Copper and Silver Underground Mine 

and Associated Facilities, Including a 

New Transmission Line, Plan-ofOperation Permit, Kootenai National 

Forest, Sanders County, MT, 

Comment Period Ends: 12/21/2011, 

Contact: Lynn Hagarty (406) 283– 

7642, Revision to FR Notice Published 

10/07/2011: Extending Comment 

Period from 11/21/2011 to 12/21/ 

2011. 

Dated: November 7, 2011. 

Cliff Rader, 

Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, 

Office of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29188 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9490–2] 

Notice of Public Meeting of the 

Interagency Steering Committee on 

Radiation Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) will host a meeting of the 

Interagency Steering Committee on 

Radiation Standards (ISCORS) on 

November 14, 2011, in Washington, DC. 

The purpose of ISCORS is to foster early 

resolution and coordination of 

regulatory issues associated with 

radiation standards. Agencies 

represented as members of ISCORS 

include the following: EPA; Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission; Department of 

Energy; Department of Defense; 

Department of Transportation; 

Department of Homeland Security; 

Department of Labor’s Occupational 

Safety and Health Administration; and 

the Department of Health and Human 

Services. ISCORS meeting observer 

agencies include the Office of Science 

and Technology Policy, Office of 

Management and Budget, Defense 

Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, as well 

as representatives from both the States 

of Illinois and Pennsylvania. ISCORS 

maintains several objectives: Facilitate a 

consensus on allowable levels of 

radiation risk to the public and workers; 

promote consistent and scientifically 

sound risk assessment and risk 

management approaches in setting and 

implementing standards for 

occupational and public protection from 

ionizing radiation; promote 

completeness and coherence of Federal 

standards for radiation protection; and 

identify interagency radiation protection 

issues and coordinate their resolution. 

ISCORS meetings include presentations 

by the chairs of the subcommittees and 

discussions of current radiation 

protection issues. Committee meetings 

normally involve pre-decisional intragovernmental discussions and, as such, 

are normally not open for observation 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES