48864 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 155 / Thursday, August 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–19819 Filed 8–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0035; FRL–9187–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; MN 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving Minnesota’s 

request to amend its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for sulfur 

dioxide (SO2). The Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency (MPCA) submitted the 

SIP revision request to EPA on 

November 23, 2009, and supplemented 

it on March 3, 2010. EPA’s approval 

revises SIP requirements applicable to 

Saint Mary’s Hospital, located in 

Rochester, Minnesota, by adding a 2500 

kilowatt (KW) reciprocating internal 

combustion engine (RICE) electric 

generator and reducing the allowable 

diesel fuel sulfur content for two 

existing RICE electric generators. The 

revision also includes administrative 

changes in the identification of 

emissions units. These revisions are 

included in a joint Title I/Title V 

document for Saint Mary’s Hospital, 

which replaces the document currently 

approved into the SIP for the facility. 

These revisions will result in reducing 

the SO2 impact in the Rochester area, 

and strengthen the existing SO2 SIP. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective October 12, 2010, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

September 13, 2010. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2010–0035, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: bortzer.jay@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 629–2054. 

4. Mail: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Jay Bortzer, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010– 

0035. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online 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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. 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, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and 

Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This 

facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Charles Hatten, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 

6031 before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Hatten, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031, 

hatten.charles@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. General Information 

II. What revision did the State request be 

incorporated into the SIP? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the State 

submission? 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This action applies only to the Saint 

Mary’s Hospital, located at 1216 Second 

St., Rochester, Minnesota (Olmsted 

County). 

B. Has public notice been provided? 

Minnesota published a public notice 

of the revisions to the SIP on August 22, 

2009. The comment period began on 

August 23, 2009, and ended on 

September 23, 2009. In the public 

notice, Minnesota stated it would hold 

a public hearing if one were requested 

during the comment period. This 

follows the alternative public 

participation process EPA approved on 

June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32274). For limited 

types of SIP revisions that the public 

has shown little interest in, a public 

hearing is not automatically required. 

Because no one requested a public 

hearing, Minnesota did not hold a 

public hearing. 

Background 

Saint Mary’s Hospital is a tertiary care 

hospital which includes several 

buildings located on a 49 acre campus. 

The Saint Mary’s Hospital is owned and 

operated by the Mayo Foundation. The 

facility is a culpable source located in 

the Rochester area’s nonattainment plan 

for the SO2 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). However, 

the area currently meets the NAAQS for 

SO2, and was officially redesignated as 

attainment on May 8, 2001. (66 FR 

14087) 

The primary emission units at the 

facility are three identical fossil fuelWReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 155 / Thursday, August 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 48865 

fired boilers (Nos. 1, 2, and 3), which 

exhaust through a common stack; one 

cogeneration turbine; and two 

emergency RICE generators. Each boiler 

burns natural gas as fuel with distillate 

oil as a backup fuel. The cogeneration 

turbine burns only natural gas. One of 

the RICE generators burns only distillate 

oil; the other can burn distillate oil or 

operate in a dual-fuel mode (95% 

natural gas and 5% distillate oil/very 

low sulfur diesel). 

Saint Mary’s Hospital is planning to 

make a physical change to the facility by 

adding a new RICE electric generator. 

The facility will also be required to 

reduce the allowable diesel fuel sulfur 

content for two existing emergency RICE 

electric generators. The State provided a 

modeling analysis of the effect of the 

changes at the facility on local SO2. 

Below, in Section III, a more detailed 

discussion of the modeling analysis and 

its results can be found. 

II. What revision did the State request 

be incorporated into the SIP? 

The State has requested that EPA 

approve, as a revision to the Minnesota 

SIP, a new joint Title I/Title V 

document that incorporates: (1) 

Administrative changes in the 

identification of emission units, (2) the 

installation a 2500 KW RICE electric 

generator, and (3) a reduction in the 

allowable diesel fuel sulfur content for 

two existing RICE electric generators. 

A. What prior SIP actions are pertinent 

to this action? 

The facility has been subject to a 

federally enforceable permit 

incorporated into Minnesota’s SIP as a 

joint Title I/Title V document, 

containing requirements for ensuring 

the attainment of the NAAQS for SO2. 

As a result, the facility is subject to fuel 

usage limitations to restrict the total 

facility SO2 emissions. 

B. What are Title I conditions and Joint 

Title I/Title V documents? 

SIP control measures were contained 

in permits issued to culpable sources in 

Minnesota until 1990 when EPA 

determined that limits in state-issued 

permits are not federally enforceable 

because the permits expire. Minnesota 

then issued permanent Administrative 

Orders to culpable sources in 

nonattainment areas from 1991 to 

February of 1996. 

Minnesota’s consolidated permitting 

regulations, approved into the SIP on 

May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), includes the 

term ‘‘Title I condition’’ which was 

written, in part, to satisfy EPA 

requirements that SIP control measures 

remain permanent. A ‘‘Title I condition’’ 

is defined as ‘‘any condition based on 

source-specific determination of 

ambient impacts imposed for the 

purposes of achieving or maintaining 

attainment with the national ambient air 

quality standard and which was part of 

the state implementation plan approved 

by EPA or submitted to the EPA 

pending approval under section 110 of 

the act * * *.’’ The rule also states that 

‘‘Title I conditions and the permittee’s 

obligation to comply with them, shall 

not expire, regardless of the expiration 

of the other conditions of the permit.’’ 

Further, ‘‘any Title I condition shall 

remain in effect without regard to 

permit expiration or reissuance, and 

shall be restated in the reissued permit.’’ 

Minnesota has initiated using joint 

Title I/Title V documents as the 

enforceable document for imposing 

emission limitations and compliance 

requirements in SIPs. The SIP 

requirements in joint Title I/Title V 

documents submitted by MPCA are 

cited as ‘‘Title I conditions,’’ therefore 

ensuring that SIP requirements remain 

permanent and enforceable. EPA 

reviewed the State’s procedure for using 

joint Title I/Title V documents to 

implement site-specific SIP 

requirements and found it to be 

acceptable under both Titles I and V of 

the Clean Air Act (July 3, 1997, letter 

from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J. 

Sandusky, MPCA). Further, a June 15, 

2006, letter from EPA to MPCA clarifies 

procedures to transfer requirements 

from Administrative Orders to joint 

Title I/Title V documents. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the State 

submission? 

This SIP revision replaces the joint 

Title I/Title V document currently 

approved into the SIP for Saint Mary’s 

Hospital with a new joint Title I/Title V 

document, Air Permit No. 10900008– 

003. The new joint document includes 

administrative changes in the 

identification of emission units, adds a 

2500 KW RICE electric generator, and 

reduces the allowable diesel fuel sulfur 

content for two existing RICE electric 

generators. 

Administrative Changes 

The new joint document reflects 

administrative changes in how the 

emission units are described. Boilers 1, 

2, and 3 were listed in the joint 

document previously issued to Saint 

Mary’s Hospital and identified as 

EU038, EU039, and EU040. In the new 

joint document, Air Permit No. 

10900008–003, these boilers are now 

identified as EU001, EU002, and EU003. 

Correspondingly, the two existing 

emergency RICE generators, which were 

previously identified as EU0041 and 

EU0042, are now identified as EU005 

and EU006. 

New Electric Generator 

The amendment to the SIP allows the 

installation of a new RICE electric 

generator. The new RICE generator, 

identified as EU012, is a 2500 kilowatt 

non-emergency compression ignition 

diesel engine subject to 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart IIII, for 2007 model year engines 

with displacement less than 10 liters per 

cylinder. In § 60.4207 of 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart IIII, the new electric generator is 

subject to a requirement to burn only 

diesel fuel with a sulfur content of less 

than 500 parts per million (ppm) by 

weight. This represents a limit of 0.05% 

sulfur by weight. Further, as of October 

1, 2010, this diesel fuel oil limit will 

decrease to 15 ppm by weight (0.0015% 

sulfur by weight). This new diesel fuel 

oil limit is imposed by 40 CFR 80.510 

upon owners or operators of new 

engines subject to 40 CFR part 60, 

subpart IIII, and is listed as a SIP 

condition to ensure that it will not 

exceed this Federal standard. 

In addition to the above said 

requirements, the SO2 emissions for 

new RICE generator will be limited to 

1.52 tons per year based upon an 

operational restriction of 2045 hours per 

year. 

Reduced SO2 Limits 

The existing boilers, cogeneration 

turbine, and generators are subject to 

fuel sulfur limits in order to comply 

with the NAAQS requirements for SO2. 

As noted above, the cogeneration 

turbine burns only natural gas, and 

therefore is not subject to any Title I SIP 

conditions for SO2. The SO2 SIP 

emission limits for the boilers are 

unchanged. The boilers must burn only 

natural gas and low-sulfur distillate 

fuel, less than 0.5% sulfur by weight. 

The existing generators have been 

subject to a requirement to burn 

distillate oil with sulfur content less 

than 0.41% by weight. In order to add 

the new generator and ensure that the 

emissions from the facility remain at or 

below current SIP levels, Saint Mary’s 

Hospital agreed to align the fuel sulfur 

requirements of the existing generators 

with the new generator. Thus, the 

existing generators will be subject to the 

same requirements as the new generator; 

namely, a requirement to burn only 

diesel fuel with a sulfur content of less 

than 500 ppm by weight. This new limit 

of 0.05% sulfur by weight is 

considerably lower than the old limit of 

0.41% sulfur by weight, resulting in a 

decrease in the amount of SO2

emissions from the existing generators 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

48866 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 155 / Thursday, August 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

by a factor of 8.2 (0.41/0.05). Further, 

the diesel fuel oil limit for the existing 

generators will decrease to 15 ppm by 

weight (0.0015% sulfur by weight) as of 

October 1, 2010, which is the same as 

the limit imposed on the new generator 

by 40 CFR 80.510. 

Modeling 

The SIP revision does not include any 

increases in SO2 emission limits but, 

because some of the changes being made 

to the facility may affect the release and 

dispersion of SO2 emissions, Saint 

Mary’s Hospital performed an air 

quality analysis to address the facility’s 

impact on the SO2 NAAQS. The facility 

was modeled both with and without the 

new generator. The modeling was done 

with the AERMOD air dispersion model 

using meteorological data from 1986 to 

1990, and included flagpole receptors in 

downtown Rochester. The high-firsthigh results for each standard averaging 

time (1 hour, 3 hour, 24 hour, and 

annual) were compared for the two 

scenarios at each receptor. With the 

addition of the 500 ppm by weight fuel 

oil sulfur content for the two existing 

generators, the results showed 

equivalent or decreased ambient 

impacts from the facility at each 

receptor, even after the installation of 

the new generator. 

TABLE—HIGH-SECOND-HIGH AMBIENT SO2 CONCENTRATION FROM FACILITY

Averaging time 

Modeled concentration (μg/m3) 

Background Total Standard 

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Max 

Facility Prior to Modification 

1-hour ....................................................... 328 318 337 317 336 337 26 363 1300 

3-hour ....................................................... 244 253 249 269 250 269 13 282 1300 

24-hour ..................................................... 124 134 110 127 132 134 5 139 365 

Annual ...................................................... 21 21 20 21 20 21 3 24 60 

Facility After Modification 

1-hour ....................................................... 301 300 320 303 319 320 26 346 1300 

3-hour ....................................................... 237 245 242 262 238 262 13 275 1300 

24-hour ..................................................... 109 117 94 121 125 125 5 130 365 

Annual ...................................................... 15 15 14 14 13 15 3 18 60 

The modeling shows that the highsecond-high impacts from the facility 

will decrease due to the changes from 

this SIP revision: the installation of the 

new generator and the decreased fuel oil 

sulfur limits on the two existing 

generators. This assures that ambient air 

quality will be protected. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving the revision to 

Minnesota’s SIP to replace the joint 

Title I/Title V document currently 

approved into the SIP for Saint Mary’s 

Hospital with a new joint Title I/Title V 

document, Air Permit No. 10900008– 

003. The new joint document includes 

administrative changes in the 

identification of emission units, adds a 

2,500 KW RICE electric generator, and 

reduces the allowable diesel fuel sulfur 

content for two existing RICE electric 

generators. In approving this joint Title 

I/Title V document, EPA is 

incorporating into the SIP only those 

requirements in the joint document 

labeled as ‘‘Title I Condition: SIP for SO2

NAAQS.’’ 

Since this SIP revision will decrease 

SO2 impacts in the Rochester area, Saint 

Mary’s revision will strengthen the 

existing SO2 SIP. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

state plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective October 12, 2010 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by September 

13, 2010. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

If we do not receive any comments, this 

action will be effective October 12, 

2010. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act and 

applicable Federal regulations. 42 

U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, 

in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 155 / Thursday, August 12, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 48867 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by October 12, 2010. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and shall not postpone the effectiveness 

of such rule or action. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide. 

Dated: August 2, 2010. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart Y—Minnesota 

■ 2. In § 52.1220 the table in paragraph 

(d) is amended by revising the entry for 

‘‘Saint Mary’s Hospital’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MINNESOTA SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS

Name of source Permit No. 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

St. Mary’s Hospital ....................... 10900008–003 03/01/10 08/12/10, [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Only conditions cited as ‘‘Title I 

condition: SIP for SO2

NAAQS.’’ 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–19822 Filed 8–11–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987–0002; FRL–9188–8] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List: Deletion of the Rogers 

Road Municipal Landfill Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 6 is publishing a 

direct final notice of deletion of the 

Rogers Road Municipal Landfill 

Superfund Site (Site), located near 

Jacksonville, Pulaski County, Arkansas 

from the National Priorities List (NPL). 

The NPL, promulgated pursuant to 

Section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the State of 

Arkansas, through the Arkansas 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions 

under CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective October 12, 2010 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

September 13, 2010. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final notice of deletion in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1987–0002 by one of the 

following methods: 

http://www.regulations.gov (Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments) 

E-mail: walters.donn@epa.gov. 

Fax: 214–665–6660 

Mail: Donn Walters, Community 

Involvement, U.S. EPA Region 6 (6SF– 

TS), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 

75202–2733, (214) 665–6483 or 1–800– 

533–3508. 

Hand Delivery: Donn Walters, 

Community Involvement, U.S. EPA 

Region 6 (6SF–TS), 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Dallas, TX 75202–2733. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES