28772 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2011 / Notices 

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: 

Entities potentially affected by these 

actions are manufacturers of 

compression-ignition engines and 

equipment. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

405. 

Frequency of Response: Annually and 

on occasion. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

40,090. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$4,086,455, includes $1,061,650 O&M 

costs. 

Changes in the Estimates: There is an 

increase of 31,543 hours in the total 

estimated burden currently identified in 

the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR 

Burdens. Total burden has increased 

significantly due to a sharp increase in 

the estimated number of participants. 

Tighter Tier 4 standards have resulted 

in engine manufacturers not being able 

to provide their customers with 

compliant engines in time for the 

effective date of the new regulations. 

This has meant that equipment 

manufacturers who did not previously 

participate in TPEM now need the 

program to reach the gap between the 

effective date of the regulations and the 

date when compliant engines are ready. 

A significant number of participants 

will also be added when the small Si 

program starts in 2011. EPA expects at 

least 150 new participants from that 

industry alone. 

Dated: May 12, 2011. 

John Moses, 

Director, Collection Strategies Division. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12217 Filed 5–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0037; FRL–8869–8] 

Federal Plan for Certification of 

Applicators of Restricted Use 

Pesticides Within Indian Country; 

Notice of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing its 

intention to implement a Federal 

program to certify applicators of 

restricted use pesticides in Indian 

country. The program will be 

administered by EPA. EPA is soliciting 

comments on EPA’s intent to implement 

a Federal certification program in Indian 

country where no other EPA-approved 

or EPA-implemented plan applies and 

on its Proposed Federal Plan for 

Certification of Applicators of Restricted 

Use Pesticides within Indian Country 

(Plan). A separate proposal and public 

comment period for a Federal 

certification plan to address use of 

restricted use pesticides in Region 8 

Indian country was recently published 

in the Federal Register on April 20, 

2011. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0037, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0037. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available on-line at http:// 

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 regulations.gov or 

e-mail. The 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the 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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

hours of operation of this Docket 

Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole Zinn, Field and External Affairs 

Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308–7076; e-mail address: 

zinn.nicole@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This notice applies to individuals and 

businesses who are seeking certification 

to apply restricted use pesticides (RUPs) 

as defined by EPA in Indian country 

where no EPA-approved plan or EPAimplemented plan applies. This action 

may, however, be of interest to those 

involved in agriculture and anyone 

involved with the distribution and 

application of pesticides for agricultural 

purposes. Others involved with 

pesticides in a non-agricultural setting 

may also be affected. Since other 

entities may also be interested, the 

Agency has not attempted to describe all 

the specific entities that may be affected 

by this action. If you have any questions 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2011 / Notices 28773 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

In addition to the sources listed in 

this unit, you may obtain copies of the 

Plan, other related documents, or 

additional information by contacting 

Nicole Zinn at the address listed under 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

II. What action is the agency taking? 

EPA is announcing its intention to 

implement a Federal program to certify 

applicators of restricted use pesticides 

(RUPs) in Indian country and seeks 

public comment. This Federal 

certification Plan describes the process 

by which EPA will implement a 

program for the certification of 

applicators of RUPs in Indian country 

based upon the certification 

requirements enumerated at 40 CFR part 

171. The Plan, in its entirety, is 

included in the docket. 

III. Introduction 

A. What is the background for this plan? 

Under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), as amended, 7 U.S.C. 136 et 

seq., the Administrator of EPA has the 

authority to classify all registered 

pesticide uses as either ‘‘restricted use’’ 

or ‘‘general use.’’ Under FIFRA, 

pesticides (or the particular use or uses 

of a pesticide) that may generally cause, 

without additional regulatory 

restrictions, unreasonable adverse 

effects on the environment, including 

injury to the applicator, shall be 

classified for ‘‘restricted use.’’ Section 

3(d)(1)(C), 7 U.S.C. 136a(d)(1)(C). If the 

classification is made because of 

hazards to the applicator, the pesticide 

may only be applied by or under the 

direct supervision of a certified 

applicator. 7 U.S.C. 136a(d)(1)(C)(i), 

136j(a)(2)(F). If the classification is 

made because of potential unreasonable 

adverse effects on the environment, the 

pesticide may only be applied by or 

under the direct supervision of a 

certified applicator or subject to such 

other restrictions as the Administrator 

may provide by regulation. 7 U.S.C. 

136a(d)(1)(C)(ii), 136j(a)(2)(F). To be 

certified, an individual must be 

determined to be competent with 

respect to the use and handling of 

pesticides covered by the certification. 

7 U.S.C 136i(a). 

It was the intent of Congress that 

persons desiring to use restricted use 

pesticides should be able to obtain 

certification under programs approved 

by EPA, as reflected in sections 11 and 

23 of FIFRA. 7 U.S.C. 136i, 136u. The 

regulations addressing Tribal and State 

development and submission of 

certification plans to EPA are contained 

at 40 CFR part 171. It is EPA’s position 

that Tribal and State plans are generally 

best suited to the needs of that 

particular Tribe or State and its citizens. 

Tribes and States, however, are not 

required to develop their own plans. 

Where EPA has not approved a State or 

Tribal certification plan, the Agency is 

authorized to implement an EPA plan 

for the Federal certification of 

applicators of restricted use pesticides 

pursuant to sections 11 and 23 of 

FIFRA. 7 U.S.C. 136i, 136u; 40 CFR 

171.11. 

EPA has drafted a Plan for those areas 

of Indian country where no other EPAapproved or EPA-implemented plan 

applies. A separate proposal and public 

comment period for a Federal 

certification plan to address use of 

restricted use pesticides in Region 8 

Indian country was recently published 

in the Federal Register on April 20, 

2011 (76 FR 22096; FRL–8855–8). 

B. What is the statutory authority for 

this plan? 

The plan will be implemented under 

the authority of section 11(a)(1) of 

FIFRA, as amended by the Food Quality 

Protection Act of August 3, 1996, and 

regulations in 40 CFR 171.11. 

Additional enforcement authorities are 

found in sections 8, 9, 13, 14, and 23 of 

FIFRA. 

C. Summary of the Plan 

1. Applicability. EPA intends to 

implement this Federal certification 

plan in ‘‘Indian country,’’ as defined in 

18 U.S.C. 1151, where no other EPAapproved or EPA-implemented plan 

applies. ‘‘Indian country’’ is defined in 

18 U.S.C. 1151 as: 

(a) All land within the limits of any Indian 

reservation under the jurisdiction of the 

United States Government, notwithstanding 

the issuance of any patent, and, including 

rights-of-way running through the 

reservation; 

(b) All dependent Indian communities 

within the borders of the United States 

whether within the original or subsequently 

acquired territory thereof, and whether 

within or without the limits of a State; and 

(c) All Indian allotments, the Indian titles 

to which have been extinguished, including 

rights-of-way running through the same. 

Consistent with the statutory definition 

of Indian country, as well as Federal 

case law interpreting this statutory 

language, EPA treats lands held by the 

Federal government in trust for Indian 

Tribes that exist outside of formal 

reservations as informal reservations 

and, thus, as Indian country. For a list 

of Federally recognized Tribes as of 

October 2010, see the Federal Register 

(October 1, 2010; 75 FR 60810), 

available at: http://www.bia.gov/idc/

groups/vxraca/documents/text/

idc011463.pdf. 

There are two types of applicators of 

restricted use pesticides: Private and 

commercial. A ‘‘private applicator’’ is 

defined as: 

A certified applicator who uses or 

supervises the use of any pesticide which is 

classified for restricted use for purposes of 

producing an agricultural commodity on 

property owned or rented by the applicator 

or the applicator’s employer or (if applied 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
28774 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2011 / Notices 

1Please see Section IX of the Plan and Unit 

III.C.2.d of this notice for commercial applicator 

categories recognized under the Plan, as there are 

proposed exceptions for sodium cyanide capsules 

used with ejector devices and sodium fluoroacetate 

used in livestock protection collars. 

2Although predicated in part on the applicator’s 

existing valid certification, any use permitted under 

this Plan is allowed and will be enforced only 

under Federal authority. 

without compensation other than trading of 

personal services between producers of 

agricultural commodities) on the property of 

another person. 7 U.S.C. 136(e)(2). 

A ‘‘commercial applicator’’ is defined 

as: 

An applicator (whether or not the 

applicator is a private applicator with respect 

to some uses) who uses or supervises the use 

of any pesticide which is classified for 

restricted use for any purpose or on any 

property other than as set forth in the 

definition of a private applicator. 7 U.S.C. 

136(e)(3). 

This Plan applies to both commercial 

and private applicators. 

2. Provisions of Plan.—i. Why is EPA 

developing a Plan? The Plan will allow 

the certification of applicators and legal 

use of RUPs in those parts of Indian 

country where there are currently no 

mechanisms in place for such 

certification and use. RUPs cannot be 

legally used in Indian country unless 

EPA has explicitly approved a 

mechanism of certification for such an 

area. To date, EPA has not approved any 

state plan for the certification of 

applicators of restricted use pesticides 

in any area of Indian country. There are 

very few areas of Indian country for 

which there are approved non-Federal 

plans and only one area that is currently 

covered under a Federal plan. 

ii. To whom will the Plan apply? The 

Plan will only apply to persons who 

intend to apply RUPs in Indian country 

excluding the areas of Indian country 

that are currently covered by another 

EPA-approved or EPA-implemented 

plan. Tribes may continue to pursue 

options available under 40 CFR 171.10 

for their areas of Indian country, 

including seeking EPA approval of 

Tribal plans for such areas under 40 

CFR 171.10(a)(2) or utilizing a state’s 

certification program under 40 CFR 

171.10(a)(1). An option implemented 

under 40 CFR 171.10 would replace this 

Federal plan for the relevant area of 

Indian country. For a list of Federally 

recognized Tribes as of October 2010, 

see the Federal Register available at: 

http://www.bia.gov/idc/groups/xraca/

documents/text/idc011463.pdf. In the 

event that the Federal applicator 

certification regulations at 40 CFR 

171.11 are revised, EPA will revisit the 

Plan to determine if modification of this 

Plan is necessary. 

iii. Certification procedures. To 

become certified to use RUPs in Indian 

country, applicators must submit an 

application form to the EPA Regional 

Office that covers the Indian country 

where they wish to apply RUPs as well 

as proof of the valid Federal, state, or 

Tribal certification upon which their 

Federal certification will be based. The 

Form is available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov under docket 

identification number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2010–0723. 

EPA is proposing that the certification 

on which the Federal certificate will be 

based must be from a state or Tribe with 

a contiguous boundary to the area of 

Indian country. EPA believes that this 

provision provides greater assurance 

that the applicator has the competency 

to apply RUPs on the contiguous area of 

Indian country. An exception will be 

included that the EPA Region has 

discretion to allow Federal certification 

under the plan based on a valid 

certification from another nearby state 

or Tribe. 

Under 40 CFR 171.11(e), a Federal 

certificate expires 2 years after the date 

of issuance for commercial applicators 

and 3 years for private applicators, or 

until the expiration date of the original 

Federal, state, or Tribal certificate, 

whichever occurs first. A proposed rule 

is currently under development that 

will allow a Federal certification based 

on a valid Federal, state or Tribal 

certification, to expire when the original 

certificate expires, unless the certificate 

is suspended or revoked. If this 

amendment is finalized, the Agency will 

utilize the expiration date of the original 

valid certification. 

Where EPA, as opposed to a Tribe or 

a state, implements a certification 

program, both FIFRA and the 

regulations require that EPA offer 

private applicators an option to be 

certified without taking an examination. 

See 7 U.S.C. 136i(a)(1), 40 CFR 

171.11(d)(1). Therefore, in lieu of 

submitting proof of a valid Federal, 

state, or Tribal certification, private 

applicators also have the option of 

showing documentation that they have 

physically attended and completed an 

approved training course and self-study 

evaluation. Federal certification under 

this option is valid for four years from 

the date of issuance, unless suspended 

or revoked. 

iv. Commercial applicator categories. 

EPA proposes to recognize the 

categories authorized in the original 

certificate, and commercial applicators 

will be authorized to apply RUPs in 

Indian country for uses covered in their 

underlying Federal, state or Tribal 

certificate. EPA is considering language 

that would generally exclude categories 

for sodium cyanide capsules used with 

ejector devices for livestock predator 

control and for sodium fluoroacetate 

used in livestock protection collars. 

Under this Plan, a Federal certificate 

would only include the sodium cyanide 

capsules and sodium fluoroacetate 

livestock protection collars categories if 

the relevant Indian Tribe for the area of 

Indian country at issue obtains its own 

registration for this product and 

conducts its own monitoring and 

supervision. 

v. Implementation. EPA will 

administer routine maintenance 

activities associated with 

implementation of this Plan and will 

conduct inspections and take 

enforcement actions as appropriate. 

States, Tribes, and other Federal 

agencies that issued a certification upon 

which the Federal certification is based 

are not approved or authorized by EPA 

to assure compliance in Indian country 

with the Federal certification provided 

by this Plan. As with all cases where a 

non-Federal official uses Federal 

credentials to conduct inspections, 

when a Tribal inspector conducts an 

inspection under Federal credentials 

under a cooperative agreement with 

EPA, violations would be referred to 

EPA for enforcement action, as 

appropriate. 

EPA may, if appropriate, deny, 

modify, suspend, or revoke the Federal 

certificate under this Plan. The 

applicant or Federal certificate holder 

has the right to request a hearing if EPA 

decides to modify, suspend, or revoke 

the Federal certificate. If EPA decides to 

deny, revoke, suspend or modify a 

Federal certificate, EPA will notify the 

agency that issued the original 

certificate upon which the Federal 

certificate was based. 

If the Federal, state, or Tribal 

certificate upon which the Federal 

certificate is based is suspended, 

modified, or revoked, EPA will begin 

procedures to suspend, modify or 

revoke the Federal certification. 

EPA will allow, during the 6 month 

period after publication of the final 

Plan, applicators to apply RUPs under 

the Plan in Indian country only for the 

categories for which they already have 

a valid state, Tribal or Federal 

certificate 1 if they submit a complete 

application to the appropriate EPA 

Region showing proof of a valid state, 

Tribal, or Federal certification.2

Beginning 6 months after publication 

of the final Plan, applicators who are 

covered under this Plan and have not 

received a written Federal certification 

from the appropriate EPA Region are 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2011 / Notices 28775 

3The draft policy was published in the Federal 

Register for comment on December 15, 2010. 

prohibited from applying RUPs in the 

Indian country of that Region. 

IV. Specific Comments Are Sought 

EPA is seeking comment on the entire 

Plan but would specifically like 

comments on the following issues: 

1. Notification to Tribes. The Tribal 

Pesticide Program Council (TPPC) has 

requested that a notification provision 

be included in the Plan. This provision 

would require that applicators of RUPs 

notify the relevant Tribe before each 

RUP application that is made in Indian 

country. The Agency has questions as to 

whether this approach can be 

practically implemented without 

causing undue burden to applicators, 

the Tribes and the Agency. 

We are interested in obtaining 

comment regarding the relative value of 

this approach as an actual requirement. 

On the one hand, requiring notification 

to Tribes prior to application could 

provide Tribes some benefit in knowing 

where and when RUP applications 

occur. EPA is concerned, however, that 

requiring notifications may impose 

resource burdens on Tribes to receive 

and review such notifications. The 

TPPC suggested a possibility that EPA 

could receive these notifications and 

post them publically for Tribes to 

access. However, EPA is not likely to 

have the capacity or resources to receive 

these notifications. EPA also notes that 

Tribes wishing to receive prior 

notification may wish to consider 

including relevant notification 

requirements under Tribal law. The 

Plan notes that applicators certified 

under the Plan are responsible for 

complying with any applicable Tribal 

requirements. 

One alternative approach being 

considered is that EPA could post a list 

of Federal certifications issued under 

this Plan. As a matter of convenience, 

EPA could arrange the list 

geographically by state or by EPA 

Region such that certifications issued 

for all Indian country located in a 

particular state or EPA Region would be 

grouped together. This approach would 

provide EPA and Tribes easy access to 

the list of applicators who may legally 

apply RUPs within Indian country. EPA 

would like to know if this option would 

be useful to Tribes. 

Another approach being considered is 

to have the Tribes provide a contact 

person to a website so that applicators 

would know who to contact to learn of 

any applicable Tribal requirements for a 

particular Tribe. Would this option be 

useful for Tribes? Would it be 

burdensome? 

2. Private applicator certification. 

Under FIFRA section 11(a)(1), for 

Federal certification plans, EPA must 

offer a no-test option for private 

applicators. For more background, see 

Unit III.C. 2. (c) of this document. EPA 

proposes that private applicators who 

wish to obtain Federal certification 

under the no-test provision submit 

documentation of physical attendance 

and completion of an EPA-approved 

training and self-study evaluation. Are 

there any other suggestions to assure 

private applicator competence in the 

absence of passing a certification exam? 

3. Option to not participate in the 

Plan. Some Tribes have indicated that 

they would prefer that the plan include 

an option for Tribes to not participate in 

the Plan (e.g., an ‘‘opt-out provision’’). 

EPA has not proposed an opt-out 

provision in the Plan for several 

reasons. First, EPA believes that Tribes 

not wanting to participate in this Plan 

may still develop their own Tribal 

certification plan or pursue other 

available mechanisms under 40 CFR 

171.10. Further, Tribes concerned about 

the application of RUPs in their Indian 

country may have the option of 

adopting additional restrictions on such 

applications through Tribal codes, laws, 

regulation or other applicable Tribal 

requirements. Additionally, EPA has not 

generally provided opt-out provisions 

for other actions under FIFRA. Other 

reasons EPA did not include an opt-out 

provision include: 

• An opt-out approach does not allow 

EPA to adequately address the equity, 

safety and enforcement issues that occur 

in the absence of this Plan. 

• There are resource and 

implementation burdens on Tribes, 

applicators and EPA that such a 

provision would impose. 

• An opt-out provision presents 

communication difficulties to the 

regulated community, and thus makes 

compliance more difficult. 

Please share your thoughts on this issue. 

V. Consultation With Tribal 

Governments 

In the absence of an EPA-approved 

certification program in areas of Indian 

county, EPA, consistent with its 

statutory authorities and the Federal 

government’s trust responsibility to 

Federally-recognized Tribes, has worked 

with the Tribes, on a government-togovernment basis, to appropriately 

develop a certification program that will 

help ensure the protection of human 

health and the environment in Indian 

country. EPA consulted with the Tribes 

on November 29 and December 13, 2010 

to ensure development of a Federal plan 

that effectively meets their needs and 

those of restricted use pesticide 

applicators in Indian country. 

During the consultations, several 

issues were discussed, such as the 

desire for notification to Tribes prior to 

RUP use, assuring the competency of 

private applicators, and the possibility 

of an opt-out provision in the Plan. EPA 

is specifically seeking comment on 

these issues as described in the previous 

section. Additional concerns were 

raised that we respect Tribal 

sovereignty, not require unfunded 

mandates, and provide adequate 

enforcement to assure RUPs are used 

legally and safely. EPA believes that the 

proposed Plan addresses all of these 

concerns. 

In addition to the consultations 

dedicated specifically to this Plan, EPA 

has also worked closely with the Tribal 

Pesticide Program Council while 

developing this Plan. 

EPA drafted the Federal plan in 

consultation with the Tribes consistent 

with, among other things, the following 

policies, orders and guidance: EPA 

Policy for the Administration of 

Environmental Programs on Indian 

Reservations, November 8, 1984; 

Guidance on the Enforcement Principles 

Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy, 

January 17, 2001; Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

November 6, 2000 which was reaffirmed 

by Presidential memorandum, Tribal 

Consultation, November 5, 2009; and 

the Proposed EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, June 9, 2010.3

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C.3501 et seq.), the 

information collection activities 

described in this document and the 

revised Information Collection Request 

(ICR), OMB Control No. 2070–0029, are 

currently going through the renewal/ 

amendment process and will be 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. As part of this process, EPA 

is proposing to implement a revised 

form designed specifically for pesticide 

applicators who wish to be certified in 

Indian country. EPA estimates the 

paperwork burden associated with 

completing this form to be 10 minutes 

per response. Under the PRA, ‘‘burden’’ 

means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, retain, disclose or 

provide information to or for a Federal 

Agency. For this collection it includes 

the time needed to review instructions; 

develop, acquire, install, and utilize 

technology and systems for the purposes 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
28776 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2011 / Notices 

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; 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 

information collection activities and the 

form are included in a separate public 

docket. See http://www.regulations.gov, 

docket identification number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2010–0723. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Education, 

Pests and pesticides. 

Dated: May 11, 2011. 

Stephen A. Owens, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12226 Filed 5–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0909; FRL–8873–4] 

Pesticide Reregistration Performance 

Measures and Goals; Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice; correction. 

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the 

Federal Register of March 2, 2011, 

concerning the Agency’s progress in 

meeting its performance measures and 

goals for pesticide reregistration during 

fiscal years 2009 and 2010. This 

document is being issued to correct two 

typographical errors. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carol P. Stangel, Pesticide Re-evaluation 

Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308–8007; e-mail address: 

stangel.carol@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

The Agency included in the notice a 

list of those who may be potentially 

affected by this action. If you have 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How can I get copies of this document 

and other related information? 

EPA has established a docket for this 

action under docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0909. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either in the electronic docket 

at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the Office of 

Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory 

Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of 

operation of this Docket Facility are 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

II. What does this correction do? 

The preamble in FR Doc. 2011–4649, 

published in the Federal Register of 

March 2, 2011 (76 FR 11456) (FRL– 

8859–4), is corrected as follows: 

1. On page 11458, Table 1, second 

column, first entry, correct ‘‘697’’ to read 

‘‘679.’’ 

2. On page 11459, Table 1, second 

column, second entry, correct ‘‘1,214’’ to 

read ‘‘1,196.’’ 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Pesticides 

and pests. 

Dated: May 5, 2011. 

William L. Jordan, 

Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12231 Filed 5–17–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9308–1] 

Re-Proposal of Effluent Limits Under 

the NPDES General Permit for Oil and 

Gas Exploration, Development and 

Production Facilities Located in State 

and Federal Waters in Cook Inlet, AK 

(AKG–31–5000) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: EPA Region 10 today reproposes six effluent limits for 

produced water under the National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) General Permit for Oil and Gas 

Exploration, Development and 

Production Facilities in State and 

Federal Waters in Cook Inlet, Permit No. 

AKG–31–5000 (Permit). The effluent 

limits subject to the re-proposal are: 

mercury, copper, total aromatic 

hydrocarbons (TAH), total aqueous 

hydrocarbons (TAqH), silver, and whole 

effluent toxicity (WET). As proposed, 

the Permit would continue to authorize 

discharges from exploration, 

development, and production facilities 

that are included in the Coastal and 

Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and Gas 

Extraction Point Source Category as 

authorized by Section 402 of the Clean 

Water Act (CWA or ‘‘the Act’’), 33 U.S.C. 

1342. 

State Certification: Section 401 of the 

Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341, requires EPA to 

seek a certification from the State that 

the conditions of the re-proposed Permit 

are stringent enough to comply with 

State water quality standards. EPA 

obtained a draft certification from the 

Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation (ADEC) on May 3, 2011. 

EPA intends to seek a final certification 

from ADEC prior to issuing the final 

Permit. When the State issues 

certification, the State may impose more 

stringent conditions than are currently 

included in the Permit re-proposal to 

ensure compliance with State water 

quality standards. EPA would then be 

required to include the more stringent 

conditions from the State certification in 

the Permit pursuant to Section 401(d) of 

the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(d). 

DATES: Comments. The public comment 

period on the re-proposed produced 

water effluent limits will be from the 

date of publication of this Notice until 

June 20, 2011. Comments must be 

received or post-marked by no later than 

midnight on June 20, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods. EPA 

will consider all comments prior to 

making its final decision. 

Mail: Send paper copies to Hanh 

Shaw, Office of Water and Watersheds, 

Mail Stop OWW–130, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101– 

3140. 

E-mail: Send electronic copies to 

shaw.hanh@epa.gov. 

Fax: Fax copies to the attention of 

Hanh Shaw at (206) 553–0165. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Deliver copies 

to Hanh Shaw, Office of Water and 

Watersheds, Mail Stop OWW–130, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 

98101–3140. Call (206) 553–1200 before 

delivery to verify business hours. 

Viewing and/or Obtaining Copies of 

Documents. A copy of the Permit reproposal, the fact sheet that fully 

explains the re-proposal, and a copy of 

the State’s draft certification of 

reasonable assurance may be obtained 

or viewed at the following locations. (1) 

EPA Region 10 Library, Park Place 

Building, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle, WA 98101–3140; (206) 553– 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES